Defamation Case: Bajrang Punia Does Not Appear Before Delhi Court On Health Grounds, Court Allows Exemption

Wrestler Bajrang Punia on Wednesday did not appear before the court on health grounds due to that the court allowed his exemption for today only.

Patiala House court issued summons to him in the defamation case. Metropolitan magistrate Yashdeep Chahal allowed the application for exemption.

The next date of hearing in the matter is September 14.

Meanwhile, the court directed counsel for complainant Naresh Dahiya to supply a copy of the complaint to the counsel for Punia.

Counsel for Punia appeared before the court. He submitted that Punia got a fever this morning. He also submitted that ‘Vakalatnama’ couldn’t be signed as Punia resides outside Delhi.

The court noted that the counsel has not filed any medical document to substantiate his submissions. The accused has not appeared despite the issuance of a summons.

Earlier, the Patiala House issued summons to Olympic medalist wrestler Bajrang Punia in a defamation case filed by Naresh Dahiya (a Wrestling coach).

Complainant Naresh Dahiya through a criminal defamation complaint stated that during the protest on May 10, 2023 at Jantar Mantar, Bajrang Punia made defamatory remarks against him in a press conference.

Court noted that the relevant extracts reveal that the accused Bajrang Punia made a reference to a rape case ongoing against the complainant (Naresh Dahiya) in Tis Hazari Court.

The accused referred to the complainant by name and stated that the complainant has no credibility to oppose protest as he was himself facing a rape case.

But during the Court witness recording complainant categorically deposed that he was acquitted in the said 2019 rape case itself and the stated fact were well known to the accused, who is a part of the same fraternity.

While issuing summons for Bajrang Punia Metropolitan Magistrate Yashdeep Chahal stated that, “on a consideration of the complaint, supporting documents and pre¬-summoning evidence, I am of the prima facie view that all the ingredients of defamation are made out.”

Furthermore, it appears that the statement made in the press conference was a result of malicious intent and wasn’t made in good faith. In view of the same, let the accused, namely, Bajrang Punia be summoned for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 499 read with Section 500 of the IPC.

However, the Court clarified that at the summoning stage, it is fairly settled that the Court isn’t required to go into a comparative analysis of the possible defence that may be taken by the accused.

Advocates Sudhir Nagar, Ashish Tanwar, Rajesh Rexwal and Ravinder Singh appeared for complainant Naresh Dahiya submitted that the fact of acquittal was well known and a malicious attack was made by the accused for tarnishing the reputation as well as complainant’s credibility for the sole reason of dissuading him from supporting the WFI President in the protest.