SC Grants BJP Leader Time To Respond In Defamation Case Against Delhi CM Kejriwal, Atishi

defamation case

The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday granted 6 weeks to Delhi BJP leader Rajiv Babbar to respond to a plea by Delhi Chief Minister Atishi and AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal, challenging an order that refused to quash a defamation case against them.

The case relates to their alleged remarks accusing the BJP of voter name deletions.

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S.V. N. Bhatti adjourned the hearing after Babbar’s counsel sought additional time to file a reply. On September 30, 2023, the apex court had issued a notice to Babbar and stayed the trial court proceedings.

Babbar, representing the BJP, claimed the alleged statements defamed the party, tarnishing its credibility among voters. He submitted an authorization letter from January 16, 2019, to substantiate his complaint as filed on behalf of the BJP.

Key Arguments

For the Complainant:
Senior advocate Sonia Mathur argued that the AAP leaders’ remarks were defamatory, intended to harm the BJP’s reputation, particularly in the context of the 2019 Parliamentary elections.

For the AAP Leaders:
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi contended that the statements were part of political discourse and did not individually target Babbar or damage his reputation. Singhvi emphasized that such comments during election campaigns should be seen as political speech, protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court noted that freedom of speech is a fundamental right and that a defamation complaint must be filed by an “aggrieved person” as per Section 199 of the CrPC. It observed that the threshold for restricting free speech is particularly high in cases involving political discourse.

The Court highlighted the need to scrutinize whether Babbar or the BJP qualifies as an “aggrieved person” under the law, adding that its verdicts generally favor the accused in such matters.

Background

Babbar filed a complaint after AAP leaders accused the BJP of influencing the Election Commission to delete the names of 30 lakh voters from specific communities—Bania, Poorvanchali, and Muslim. The alleged remarks were made during a December 2018 press conference.

The AAP leaders, including Kejriwal, Atishi, and others, sought the quashing of the trial court’s summons orders, issued on March 15, 2019, and upheld by the sessions court on January 28, 2020.

Trial Court’s Position

The trial court held that the statements were prima facie defamatory, intended to malign the BJP and gain political advantage. It found sufficient grounds to summon the AAP leaders for offenses under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The high court also dismissed their plea, stating that the summoning orders did not warrant interference.

The Supreme Court will next hear the matter after Babbar files his response, as the legal question of whether a political party or its representative can be considered an “aggrieved person” under Section 199 remains central to the case.