Defamation Case: SC Extends Order Exempting Shivraj Singh Chouhan From Personal Appearance

Criminal defamation case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday extended its previous order exempting Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan from personal appearance before a trial court in a criminal defamation case.

The case was filed against him by Congress MP and senior advocate Vivek Tankha.

A bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal postponed the hearing on the plea filed by Chouhan and two other BJP leaders, BJP state president V D Sharma and former minister Bhupendra Singh, to March 26.

Allegations Of Defamation

Tankha alleged that Chouhan, Sharma, and Singh orchestrated a “coordinated, malicious, false, and defamatory” campaign against him. The Congress leader claimed that the accusations were politically motivated and aimed at gaining electoral advantage. He further asserted that the BJP leaders falsely accused him of opposing the reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBC) during the 2021 Panchayat elections in Madhya Pradesh.

Legal Proceedings

The criminal defamation case was lodged as a result of these allegations. The trial court had initially summoned Chouhan and the other BJP leaders to appear in person.

However, Chouhan’s legal counsel moved the Supreme Court, seeking relief from mandatory personal appearances, citing his responsibilities as a Union Minister.

With the Supreme Court extending its exemption order, Chouhan will not be required to appear in person until the next hearing. The apex court’s decision to defer the hearing provides temporary relief to Chouhan and his co-accused while the case continues to unfold.

Political Repercussions

The defamation case has further intensified the political rivalry between the BJP and the Congress in Madhya Pradesh. While the BJP has dismissed the allegations as baseless, Congress leaders maintain that the accused should be held accountable for their statements.

As the matter is set to be taken up again on March 26, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court’s next course of action in this high-profile legal and political battle.