On Monday, the Delhi High Court decided to exempt a lawyer from paying the Rs. 1 lakh costs that were previously imposed on them.

This came after the lawyer filed a public interest lawsuit aiming to curb media houses from generating undue pressure and broadcasting sensational headlines regarding Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's resignation and the imposition of President's Rule in Delhi.

The division bench, led by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora, instructed the petitioner, Shrikant Prasad, to engage in community service as directed by the DSLSA (Delhi State Legal Services Authority).

Shrikant Prasad, a practicing advocate, had filed a PIL requesting permission for Arvind Kejriwal, who was in judicial custody due to a liquor policy case, to continue governing from jail. The court recently dismissed the plea and imposed a fine of Rs. 1 lakh.

However, Prasad submitted an application today seeking a waiver of the fine, admitting his error and acknowledging that the PIL was legally flawed. His counsel informed the court that Prasad has a history of submitting genuine petitions in various courts, including the Supreme Court.

Additionally, Prasad expressed his willingness to perform community service if the imposed costs were waived. The court, in its decision to waive the costs, directed that any future petition filed by Prasad in any court must include a copy of the dismissed PIL along with today's order.

The PIL aimed to secure arrangements for Arvind Kejriwal to engage with cabinet ministers via virtual conferencing while he was in judicial custody.

The PIL also requested to restrain Virendra Sachdeva, the BJP Delhi president, from exerting any "undue pressure" through protests or statements by "illegal means" for Arvind Kejriwal's resignation. Furthermore, it sought action against him for organizing an "illegal assembly" for a protest at DDU Marg on April 10.

In its dismissal, the bench noted that Arvind Kejriwal had already filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and the Supreme Court was deliberating on the matter of interim release. Therefore, the PIL's request for allowing Kejriwal to interact with cabinet ministers through virtual conferencing was deemed unnecessary by the bench.