The Supreme Court extended the defamation proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal


The Supreme Court extended the defamation proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal

The Supreme Court had asked the trial court not to take up the defamation case till further orders.

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court on Monday extended the stay on the defamation case against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, giving time to the parties to explore settlement options.

Mr Kejriwal has challenged the Delhi High Court's order upholding the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case in May 2018 for retweeting an allegedly defamatory video circulated by YouTuber Dhruv Rathi. has gone

A bench of Justices Sanjeev Khanna and Dipankar Dutta said that the interim stay already granted will remain in place till further orders.

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, said that after the last hearing on March 11, the parties could not contact each other to discuss the settlement.

Complainant Vikas Sankartian's counsel said that no one contacted him after the previous hearing. The bench told the counsel that Kejriwal's side would now approach the complainant, and fixed the matter for further hearing in the week beginning August 12.

On March 11, the Supreme Court asked Mr. Kejriwal if he wanted to apologize to the complainant.

Mr Kejriwal had told the Supreme Court on February 26 that he had erred by retweeting an allegedly defamatory video circulated by YouTuber Rathi about the BJP IT cell.

A lawyer appearing for Sankartian has told the Supreme Court that Kejriwal can apologize for his actions on social media platforms like 'X' or Instagram.

On February 26, the Supreme Court, without issuing notice on Kejriwal's petition challenging the High Court order, asked the complainant if he wanted to close the matter after the petitioner accepted his mistake.

The Supreme Court had asked the trial court not to take up Kejriwal's defamation case till further orders.

In its February 5 judgment, the high court held that reposting defamatory material would attract the provisions of the defamation law.

It states that a sense of responsibility must be exercised when retweeting content that one does not know about, and that failure to do so should invite criminal, civil and tortious action if it is retweeted. The doer does not attach a disclaimer.

The High Court had refused to quash the trial court's 2019 order summoning Kejriwal, saying that when a public figure tweets a defamatory post, the ramifications go far beyond a whisper in one's ear.

It said that if the act of retweeting or reposting is allowed to be misused, as it is still considered a gray area of ​​the law, it would be open to people with ulterior motives to abuse it. will encourage and simply claim that they simply retweeted a piece of content.

The Chief Minister had asserted in the High Court that the trial court failed to appreciate that his tweet was not intended to harm the complainant.

Sankartian claimed that a YouTube video titled 'BJPIT Cell Part II' was circulated by Rathi, who lives in Germany, “making several false and defamatory allegations”.

(Other than the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Leave a Comment

“The Untold Story: Yung Miami’s Response to Jimmy Butler’s Advances During an NBA Playoff Game” “Unveiling the Secrets: 15 Astonishing Facts About the PGA Championship”