Rule of Law Over Narratives: Delhi Court Invokes Martin Luther King Jr. While Clearing Arvind Kejriwal

The ruling, delivered Friday at the Rouse Avenue Courts, dismissed the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) case against 23 individuals, including BRS leader K. Kavitha. Judge Singh’s order was a scathing critique of the federal agency’s investigative methodology, accusing it of "arranging" facts to fit a predetermined narrative rather than following the evidence. By quoting King’s famous axiom—"injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"—the court signaled that the prolonged incarceration of high-ranking public officials without a prima facie case constitutes a fundamental threat to the constitutional order.

Central to the discharge was the court’s dismantling of the CBI’s "overarching conspiracy" theory. The judge ruled that the agency failed to demonstrate a "meeting of minds" to commit an illegal act. In a significant clarification of economic law, the court noted that policy choices resulting in uneven market outcomes or corporate profitability do not, by themselves, constitute a criminal conspiracy. The judgment emphasized that the judiciary’s role is to uphold the rule of law rather than endorse "dominant narratives" or "convenient outcomes," effectively rejecting the CBI’s thousands of pages of circumstantial "dot-joining."

The emotional weight of the verdict was visible outside the courtroom, where a tearful Arvind Kejriwal addressed the media, describing the years-long investigation as the "biggest political conspiracy" in the history of Independent India. Kejriwal asserted that the discharge was a vindication of his party’s "Kattar Imaandar" (staunchly honest) image. While the Aam Aadmi Party celebrates this trial-stage victory, the legal battle may shift to the High Court, as the CBI is expected to challenge the discharge, and a separate money laundering probe by the Enforcement Directorate remains technically active.

Ultimately, this judgment serves as a pivotal moment for the Indian judiciary, reinforcing the standard that criminal prosecution must be evidence-centric rather than identity-driven. By invoking the global struggle for civil justice, the court has framed the protection of individual liberty against state overreach as the cornerstone of public confidence in the administration of justice.