I have seen Kejriwal’s speech before the National Executive in which he has made many allegations against Yogendra Yadav. and Prashant Bhushan
The point, however, is why Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan were not allowed to reply, and instead voting against them was done immediately after Kejriwal’s speech ?
In justice there is a requirement that both sides should be heard. Why was there such a hurry to pass the resolution without even affording an opportunity of hearing to those against whom the resolution was being passed ? Does this not create an impression that everything was pre-planned ?
In his speech Kejriwal seeks to create an impression that he is a martyr, an innocent victim, a lamb sought to be devoured by wolves. If that were the truth, why was there a fear of a counter version being put up by those two ‘wolves’ ?
Ramzan Chaudhuri and Yogendra Yadav have both said that when immediately after Kejriwal.s speech the resolution against PB and YY was moved they protested that at least PB and YY should be heard in their defence, but their request was rejected Was this fair ?
By Justice Katju’s Blog