DUSU

The court said: "The CBI shall not proceed with the investigation under the impugned order. It is however clarified that if there are any specific complaints which are received by Lokpal against any other officials of the MCD or in general against unauthorised constructions, there would be no interdiction of the Lokpal proceedings, in accordance with law, in such a matter."

The court directed Satyendar Jain's counsel to submit written submissions by January 18, the next date of hearing. All three were denied bail on November 17, 2022. Appearing for the minister, senior advocate N. Hariharan read relevant portions of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case's charge sheet to the court.

A bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said that Article 187 of the Constitution, which provides that the house or each house of the legislature of a state shall have a separate secretarial staff, thus, has no applicability to the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi. "The posts can be created in the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi with the approval of Lt. Governor, Delhi, who is the competent authority by virtue of delegation of powers in this regard under Article 309 of the Constitution.

A division bench headed by Justice Satish Chandra Sharma heard the arguments. The plea stated that the city government has been paying millions to the Delhi Waqf Board for the payment of salaries to imams, maulvis, and other members of masjids across the national capital.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma directed the ED to file its response within two weeks and the matter has been listed for December 20. On Tuesday, Satyendar Jain had moved to HC challenging a trial court's order denying him bail in the alleged money laundering case filed by the ED.

Special Judge Vikas Dhull of the Rouse Avenue Court pronounced the order which was deferred earlier. The same judge was scheduled to pronounce the order on Wednesday. However, the court deferred the matter, citing the order was not ready. A detailed order will be made available later in the day. Jain, whose bail has been denied in various hearings since his arrest in the PMLA case on May 30, is presently lodged in Tihar Jail.

After hearing the submissions of the parties, Justice Sanjeev Narula also directed the poll panel to adjudicate the pending dispute as expeditiously as possible and dismissed the plea. A detailed order along with reasons for dismissing the plea will be made available later, the court said.

Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain submitted that the security agencies were satisfied with the adequate arrangements made to ensure Swamy's safety and security.

Citing security reasons, Swamy, who was the former Union Minister, was allotted the government accomodation in the Lutyens zone by the cabinet committee on January 15, 2016 for a period of five years. He was knocking the doors of the high court seeking re-allotment of the accommodation citing 'continuing security threats'. His Rajya Sabha term came to an end in April 2022.

The separate affidavits filed by the Gandhis were in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking registration of an FIR against them for alleged hate speeches delivered during anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 protests which led to the Delhi riots in February 2020.