New Delhi, Sep 30 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the defamation case against AAP Leader Arvind Kejriwal and Delhi Chief Minister Atishi filed by Delhi BJP leader Rajiv Babbar for their remarks over the alleged deletion of voters’ names from electoral rolls in the national capital ahead of the Lok Sabha elections.
A Bench comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti, while staying the defamation, case said, “No imputation is said to harm a person’s reputation, unless that imputation, directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person.”
The Court issued notice and said, “Considered the matter. Issue Notice. Returnable within four weeks. Meanwhile, further proceedings are stayed.”
The High Court had on September 2, 2024, refused to quash the defamation proceeding against Kejriwal and Atishi. The High Court observed that the statements in the present case, are prima facie defamatory, intending to vilify the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) and gain undue political mileage.
Appearing for the AAP leaders Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that nowhere in the complaint it is mentioned how his reputation is lowered in the estimation of others.
Singhvi said, “My lords have defined aggrieved persons. Here it is a BJP leader as complainant by being an authorised representative of BJP Delhi Pradesh which is not a legal entity nor named or defamed by me.”
Singhvi argued that Rajiv Babbar is not even named by me. He is an authorised representative of an unrecognised legal entity which is not a determinate class in itself.
Singhvi read out the speeches in question and said it is a part of a political discourse.
Justice Bhatti said, “Sobriety is missing.”
Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur, appearing for Babbar, contended that the precedents referred by Singhvi would not apply in this case.
The Bench noted, “The statements were made on the eve of the Lok Sabha campaign… as in the run-up to the parliamentary elections, and those should be read as part of the political disclosure.”
The Court said, “The issue as to whether Respondent No. 2(BJP) is an aggrieved person within the definition of Section 199 CrPC will require examination.”
Babbar in his petition alleged that Kejriwal and other leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) defamed the BJP by accusing it of orchestrating the removal of 30 lakh names from the Delhi electoral rolls, specifically targeting communities such as Bania, Muslims, and others.
Earlier, Kejriwal and the other accused AAP leaders approached the High Court, seeking to quash two lower court orders: a magisterial court’s order dated March 15, 2019, and a sessions court’s order dated January 28, 2020.
The Trial Court had earlier observed that the allegations made by Kejriwal and the AAP leaders were prima facie defamatory and targeted the BJP.
