The Supreme Court is set to hear on Monday a plea by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, challenging a Delhi High Court ruling that upheld the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case. The case pertains to his retweet of an allegedly defamatory video circulated by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in May 2018.
A three-judge bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Sanjay Kumar, and R Mahadevan is expected to hear the matter, in which Kejriwal has admitted to having “committed a mistake” by retweeting the alleged defamatory content.
On March 11, the Supreme Court asked Kejriwal if he wished to issue an apology to the complainant. Earlier, on February 26, Kejriwal had informed the apex court that his retweet of the video concerning the BJP IT Cell was a mistake. The complainant’s counsel, Vikas Sankrityayan, suggested that Kejriwal could apologize on social media platforms such as ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) or Instagram.
Without issuing notice on Kejriwal’s plea against the high court’s decision, the Supreme Court on February 26 had inquired whether the complainant wanted to resolve the matter, considering Kejriwal had admitted his mistake. The top court also directed the trial court to refrain from proceeding with the defamation case against Kejriwal until further orders.
In its February 5 ruling, the high court held that reposting allegedly defamatory content falls under the purview of defamation law. The court emphasized that a sense of responsibility must accompany the retweeting of content about which one is unaware and noted that retweeting defamatory content could lead to criminal, civil, and tortious liability unless accompanied by a disclaimer.
The high court, in refusing to quash the trial court’s 2019 order summoning Kejriwal, observed that when a public figure retweets a defamatory post, the consequences extend far beyond mere gossip. It warned that if retweeting or reposting defamatory content is left unchecked, it could lead to its misuse, with individuals claiming they merely retweeted the content.
Kejriwal had argued before the high court that the trial court failed to recognize that his retweet was not intended to harm the complainant. Meanwhile, Sankrityayan alleged that the YouTube video titled “BJP IT Cell Part II,” circulated by Rathee, who resides in Germany, contained numerous false and defamatory claims.
