New Delhi:
A Delhi court on Thursday dismissed a criminal defamation complaint filed by Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit against former chief minister Atishi and AAP MP Sanjay Singh, underscoring their “legitimate exercise of fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression”.
Additional chief judicial magistrate Paras Dalal refused to take cognisance of Mr Dikshit’s complaint and said the averments and contentions labelled defamatory by him were “not imputation” but “political aspirations and assertions”.
The order said the statements of the AAP politicians urged the public to make a “wise decision of their precious vote” and couldn’t be termed as imputations “worthy of scrutiny” under defamation laws.
“This court fails to find that the necessary ingredients of criminal defamation are prima facie not made out. The press conference and averments made by the respondents is nothing more than political discourse amongst rival and competing parties,” it said.
The statements were observed to have done “nothing but cast political aspirations” and “assertions on the complainant” and his party Indian National Congress (INC) without the mental element to cause harm to Mr Dikshit’s reputation, the judge said.
“Since no prima facie offence has been made out from the ‘complaint of facts’, this court declines to take cognisance of the offence,” the judge said.
The court said the statement–“BJP is helping Congress in the Delhi election”–was neither aimed at Mr Dikshit, nor was it defamatory.
“The AAP stating in the elections that BJP and INC are acting in collusion with aim to defeat the AAP, would not be defamatory, rather would be very well covered within the ‘fundamental freedom of speech and expression’,” the court added.
Mr Dikshit, the court held, couldn’t be defamed for a reference made to the INC.
On Mr Dikshit’s allegation that the AAP leaders claimed he had accepted “crores of rupees” from the BJP, the judge said some bits and pieces of the averments made, or answers to the questions of the reporters, couldn’t be seen in isolation.
“The respondent number 1 (Ms Atishi) can clearly be seen to have stated that INC was getting funds for campaign of its candidates and Mr Dikshit was one of them,” the judge said.
The respondents even asked the INC to come clean on the funding of their candidates, including Mr Dikshit, it added.
“These (alleged defamatory statements) seem to be a simple line of questions in elections period by opposing factions and also a legitimate exercise of fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. Casting political aspiration and making assertions on the actions of the opposing candidates cannot always be termed imputation to defame,” it added.
Some statements though distasteful towards a political candidate, the court said, were to be received and responded to before the media and the public, rather being agitated in court.
The court said in a triangular contest each candidate fought an individual battle but given the nature of elections in the country, it was not uncommon for them to allege other two rival candidates were in cahoots.
Politics was not alien to such speeches of casting political aspirations and assertions on the rival candidates, it said.
“A candidate cannot be called to have defamed the other, when they are presenting certain scenarios of win to the opposite candidate. One candidate during elections may allege that once opposite candidate wins, they make turn coats and join a rival faction. Such assertions have come true and even independent candidates go on to join the party who wins the elections,” the order said.
The verdict highlighted Indian elections to be dynamic where voters had the real voice.
According to the complainant, at a press conference Ms Atishi and Mr Singh alleged that Mr Dikshit not only took “crores of rupees from the BJP, but Congress had also colluded with the ruling party to defeat AAP”.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
