Alleging Association With A Political Party By Itself Not Defamation: Allahabad HC Dismisses International Shooter Vartika Singh’s Plea Against Smriti Irani

Vartika Singh (complainant), an international sharpshooter, had filed a criminal complaint against Cabinet Minister Smriti Irani alleging that she made defamatory statements in print and electronic media that damaged her reputation.

The complaint alleged that Smriti Irani had made statements accusing the complainant of conspiring with the Congress Party and being a "criminal element". The statements were widely broadcast by electronic and print media, tarnishing the reputation of the complainant and defaming her.

The High Court had to determine whether the statements made by the Union Minister may be termed as imputation sufficient enough to summon her to face trial for committing an offence under Section 499 IPC.

A Single Bench of Justice Faiz Alam Khan observed, “To constitute defamation under section 499 IPC, there has to be an imputation and such imputation must have been made with an intention of harming or having reason to believe that it will harm to the reputation of a person about whom it is made. It is required to show that accused of defamation has intended or known or has a reason that imputation made by him/her would harm the reputation of complainant, irrespective of the fact that whether the complainant has actually suffered directly or indirectly from such imputation.”

Advocate Rohit Kumar Tripathi represented the applicant, while AGA Rajesh Singh appeared for the opposite parties.

The police report suggested that the Union Minister had not taken names of any person in her statements and had only referred to a political party i.e. Congress Party. Moreover, there were three pending criminal cases registered against the complainant.

Based on this, the Court stated that the statements made by Smriti Irani were part of a longer interaction with media personnel and that she had just criticized a political party. Additionally, allegations of association with a political party, even with the “Gandhi Family”, may not necessarily be defamatory, and the statements should be viewed in their entirety to assess their defamatory nature.

The Court explained that summoning in a criminal trial only based on the statements of the complainant and few witnesses was a "serious business" as it could place stigma, even if a person were to be eventually acquitted after many years of painful trial.

The Court had held that the complainant appeared to be “a shooter of international fame and standarad, she may be ideal to may youngsters, specially the girls and…by the impugned statements her reputation is not likely to be tarnished.”

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the application.

Cause Title: Vartika Singh v. State Of U.P. & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:20598)

Appearance:

Applicant: Advocates Rohit Kumar Tripathi and Shamshad Ahmad

Opposite Parties: AGA Rajesh Singh

Click here to read/download the Order