New Delhi:

A court here on Monday sentenced activist Medha Patkar to five months simple imprisonment in a 23-year-old defamation case lodged against her by Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena when he headed an NGO in Gujarat.

Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma also imposed a fine of Rs 10 lakh on Ms Patkar.

The court sentenced Ms Patkar after considering the evidence before it and the fact that the case went on for over two decades.

However, the court suspended the sentence for one month to enable Ms Patkar to file an appeal against the order.

Rejecting Ms Patkar’s prayer to release her on the condition of probation, the judge said, “Considering the facts…damages, age and ailment (of the accused), I am not inclined to give excessive punishment.” The offence entailed a maximum punishment of simple imprisonment of up to two years or fine or both.

On May 24, the court had observed that Ms Patkar’s statements calling Mr Saxena a “coward” and alleging his involvement in hawala transactions were not only defamatory per se but also crafted to incite negative perceptions about him.

Also, the accusation that the complainant was “mortgaging” the people of Gujarat and their resources to foreign interests was a direct attack on his integrity and public service, it had said.

The arguments on sentencing were completed on May 30, following which the judgment on the quantum of sentence was reserved on June 7.

Ms Patkar and Mr Saxena have been locked in a legal tussle since 2000 after she filed a suit against him for publishing advertisements against her and the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA).

Mr Saxena, who then headed an Ahmedabad-based NGO named ‘Council for Civil Liberties’, had also filed two cases against Ms Patkar in 2001 for making derogatory remarks against him on a TV channel and issuing a defamatory press statement.

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

Mumbai:

Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde has issued a legal notice to Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut over a “defamatory” article which claimed that Mr Shinde tried to ensure the defeat of ally NCP’s candidates in the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

Sanjay Raut shared on X the legal notice dated May 28, adding that it was a “very interesting” and “funny political document”. Sources close to the chief minister confirmed that such a notice has been issued.

The notice said that in his column in the Shiv Sena mouthpiece ‘Saamana’ on May 26, Mr Raut made a false statement that Chief Minister Shinde spent “unlimited amount of money” and distributed crores of rupees in each constituency. The article further claimed that Mr Shinde did all this to ensure the defeat of the candidates of the Ajit Pawar-led Nationalist Congress Party, it said.

These statements were not only false but “defamatory and scandalous”, and made to mislead the people and create unrest, the notice said.

“The defamatory news article has been published by you to get name, fame and political mileage for yourself and your so-called leader Shri Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray,” it said, asking Mr Raut to produce evidence to back his allegations.

If he could not do so, the Rajya Sabha member should apologise within three days or face criminal and civil proceedings, the notice said.

The BJP, Shinde-led Shiv Sena and Ajit Pawar-led NCP are partners in the ruling Mahayuti alliance in the state.
 

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

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court on Monday asked Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who has challenged a Delhi High Court order upholding the summons issued to him as an accused in a criminal defamation case, whether he wanted to give an apology to the complainant in the matter.

On February 26, Mr Kejriwal told the Supreme Court that he made a mistake by retweeting an allegedly defamatory video circulated by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee related to the BJP IT Cell.

During the hearing on Monday, a bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta was told by the counsel appearing for complainant Vikas Sankrityayan that Mr Kejriwal may issue an apology on public platforms like microblogging platform ‘X’ or Instagram.

“You tell us what you want. We can put it to the other side. We are not going to step into your shoes or the other side’s shoes,” the bench told the counsel.

The bench said the complainant can give the format of the apology to Mr Kejriwal.

“So, if you want to give an apology, you can circulate it without prejudice to your rights and contentions. Let him examine,” the bench told senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, who was appearing for Kejriwal.

“Otherwise we will examine the legal issue whether merely re-tweeting is criminal offence or not… We may agree with you, we may agree with the other side. We will examine that,” the bench said.

When one of the lawyers sought time to take instructions, the bench said, “Show him the apology. If he agrees to it, then it is fine”.

While posting the matter for hearing in the week commencing May 13, the bench said its earlier order asking the trial court not to take up the defamation case till March 11 would continue till the next date of hearing.

On February 26, the Supreme Court, without issuing notice on Kejriwal’s plea challenging the high court order, had asked the complainant whether he wanted to close the matter in view of the petitioner accepting it was a mistake.

Singhvi had said it was a case for retweeting on social media platform ‘X’ and the complaint filed was immediately followed by recording of pre-summoning evidence.

“Thereafter, the complaint was withdrawn. When it was refiled, after nine months of the retweeting, it was suppressed that the original complaint was withdrawn,” the senior lawyer had said.

In its February 5 verdict, the high court said that reposting alleged libellous content would attract the defamation law.

It said a sense of responsibility has to be attached while retweeting content about which one does not have knowledge and added that retweeting defamatory content must invite penal, civil as well as tort action if the person retweeting it does not attach a disclaimer.

The high court, while refusing to quash the trial court’s 2019 order summoning Kejriwal, had said when a public figure tweets a defamatory post, the ramifications extend far beyond a mere whisper in someone’s ears.

It had said if the act of retweeting or reposting is allowed to be misused as it is still considered to be a vacant grey area of law, it will encourage people with ill intentions to misuse it and conveniently take a plea that they had merely retweeted a content.

The chief minister had said in the high court that the trial court failed to appreciate that his tweet was not intended or likely to harm the complainant.

Sankrityayan claimed the YouTube video titled ‘BJP IT Cell Part II’ was circulated by Rathee, who lives in Germany, “wherein a number of false and defamatory allegations were made”. 

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