Synopsis
A Delhi court dismissed a criminal defamation case against BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj, stating her comments on AAP leader Satyendra Jain were based on public information from the ED. The court ruled that Swaraj’s statements did not intend to harm Jain’s reputation.
PTIA Delhi court on Thursday dismissed a criminal defamation against BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj saying her statement was a reiteration of the information already put in the public domain by the ED. Rejecting the case filed by AAP leader Satyendra Jain, additional chief judicial magistrate Neha Mittal refused cognisance on his complaint and said the “spirit of information” put on the public platform by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was that Jain had a role to play in the recovery of cash and gold, effected during the searches conducted by the agency at the premises belonging to him and his accomplice.
Swaraj wrote the alleged defamatory tweet based on the information in the print media based on the ED’s tweet, the judge noted.
“The statement made by the proposed accused was a mere reiteration of the information which was already propagating in the public (domain) and hence, cannot be said to have been made with the intent to harm the reputation of the complainant. Hence, in view of the above discussion, the statement made by proposed accused cannot amount to the offence of defamation,” held the court.
The criminal defamation carries a maximum punishment of a two-year jail term.
Jain alleged that Swaraj made defamatory remarks against him during an interview on a TV channel on October 5, 2023, and claimed it was watched by millions.
Swaraj, he said, falsely claimed that Rs 3 crore were recovered from his house aside from 1.8 kilogram gold and 133 gold coins.
The remarks were made by Swaraj to defame Jain and to gain undue political advantage, his complaint said.
Jain said Swaraj further defamed him by calling him “corrupt” and a “fraud”.
The judge noted that the Jain’s party itself admitted the fact that impression was being created by the information displayed by ED that recovery of cash and gold has been effected from his house.
“Thus, it cannot be said that the statement made by proposed accused was prima facie false was made with the intent to harm the reputation of the complainant. Rather, there appears substantial truth in the statement made by proposed accused,” she said.
Given the nature of information floating among the general public through print media and other sources, the court observed it was quite probable that Swaraj’s remarks were made in good faith and not with intent to harm Jain’s reputation.
While further noting that Jain and Swaraj were members of different political parties, the judge said that it was very common among politicians to make attempt to use any piece of information, adverse to their rival political parties, that they are able to lay hands on, to their benefit by highlighting the same in media.
“It is the duty of the politicians to bring fore in the notice of general public, the shortcomings of their opponents. At the same time, it is the duty of the court to differentiate between such statements and defamatory statements while protecting and balancing the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression,” added the order.
