Delhi High Court to Hear BJP Leader’s Plea Against CM Atishi in Defamation Case
The Delhi High Court will hear BJP leader Praveen Shankar Kapoor's plea against Delhi CM Atishi, challenging the dismissal of his defamation case. The petition questions the legal validity of the special judge's decision.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court is set to hear a plea filed by BJP leader Praveen Shankar Kapoor on Monday, challenging the dismissal of his defamation case against Delhi Chief Minister Atishi.
The petition seeks to quash an order that dismissed Kapoor’s defamation complaint and quashed the summons issued by a magisterial court.
Table of Contents
The plea, which will be heard by Justice Vikas Mahajan, argues that the special judge, who rejected the defamation complaint, exceeded his legal powers. Kapoor, a former media head and spokesperson for the
Delhi BJP contends that the judge’s ruling was politically motivated and interfered with the legal process. According to Kapoor, the judge’s decision went beyond the scope of the law by engaging in political discourse, rather than addressing the legal merits of the case.
Background of the Defamation Case
The defamation case centers around allegations made by Atishi during a press conference on January 27, 2024, and later on April 2, 2024. In these conferences, Atishi accused the BJP of attempting to bribe AAP MLAs with offers of Rs 20-25 crore to switch sides, a claim Kapoor argues was baseless and defamatory. In his complaint, Kapoor also named Delhi’s former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal as an accused in the case.
Kapoor’s complaint was initially examined by a magisterial court, which ruled on May 28, 2024, that there was insufficient evidence to proceed against Kejriwal.
However, the complaint regarding Atishi continued to be a point of contention, as the special judge’s court revisited the case and decided to quash the summons issued to Atishi.
Legal Grounds for Challenge
Kapoor’s plea argues that the special judge overstepped his legal authority by dismissing the defamation case, which Kapoor claims was based on legally valid allegations.
The BJP leader accuses the special judge of indulging in political adventurism, suggesting that the judge’s comments on political discourse—such as determining which political entity is “bigger” or “smaller”—were inappropriate and irrelevant to the legal proceedings.
Kapoor’s petition asserts that the judge failed to give him an opportunity for a trial where he could present evidence to substantiate his allegations.
The plea highlights the “legal infirmities” in the judge’s decision, claiming that the special judge veered into areas unrelated to the legal issues at hand. According to Kapoor, the judge’s ruling ignored the seriousness of the allegations and undermined the integrity of the judicial process.
Atishi’s Defense and Court’s Ruling
Atishi, in her defense, contended that the remarks made during her press conferences were part of her right to free speech, particularly concerning political corruption. She argued that her statements were not defamatory but an exercise of political discourse, which is protected under the Constitution.
On January 28, the special judge, Vishal Gogne, sided with Atishi, stating that the allegations she made fell under the protection of free speech related to political corruption and did not constitute defamation.
The special judge further noted that the evidence presented prior to the summons did not meet the necessary legal threshold to justify calling Atishi an accused in a defamation case.
Consequently, the judge quashed the summons against Atishi, ruling that there were insufficient grounds for her prosecution under defamation law.
Political Implications and Impact
This defamation case has stirred political controversy, particularly in the context of the ongoing rivalry between the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Delhi. The allegations of bribery and corruption have intensified the political debate in the capital, with both parties accusing each other of political manipulation.
Kapoor’s legal challenge against Atishi represents a significant moment in this political conflict, as the outcome of the case could have broader implications for freedom of speech in the context of political discourse.
The BJP leader’s petition also highlights the ongoing tension between the ruling AAP government in Delhi and the central BJP leadership.
With the case now moving to the Delhi High Court, the legal battle will be closely watched by political observers, as it could set a precedent for how defamation cases involving politicians are handled in the future.
