Arvind Kejriwal Tells Supreme Court That He Made A Mistake, After Court Said That Even 'Retweeting' Has Consequences In Criminal Defamation Case

Kejriwal’s acceptance came when the bench categorically said that even retweeting has its consequences.

The bench has adjourned the matter on the request of the Counsel for the Complainant, to seek instructions as to whether the Complainant is ready to withdraw his complaint considering the Chief Minister’s statement.

A Bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta also observed that in the meanwhile, the matters will not be taken up by the Trial Court.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Kejriwal and Advocate Raghav Awasthi appeared for respondent No. 2, the Complainant. 

During the arguments, Justice Khanna outrightly remarked, “On the question of retweet, there are two ways to look at it. One is if it's an endorsement. If it's an endorsement, it may have its own consequences. The other way to look at it is merely you found or on the Twitter website and you are just informing”.

“Will that not be a matter of evidence in a given case of this nature…what I put around is for a layman or for a simple matter but in a case where of this nature in which we look at the background of facts, will it be the first one or the second one will be a matter which has to be determined in evidence”, Justice Khanna added further.

However, Singhvi then submitted, “This is not a kind of case where you must go with a political motive behind somebody…”.

“But you were also doing that only”, commented Justice Khanna.

“No, milords it's okay. I made a mistake. I don’t mind saying it’s a mistake if I know the consequence…”, said Singhvi in response.

Previously, in the impugned order, the Delhi High Court had observed that retweeting defamatory content can also attract the offence of defamation under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.

Refusing to quash a criminal defamation case filed against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for re-tweeting a video titled ‘BJP IT Cell Part 2’, the Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma had observed that, "Needless to say, the large social media following of a Chief Minister of a State undoubtedly implies a wider reach, making any retweet, a form of public endorsement or acknowledgment." It was further observed that, "the online interactions and engagement on Twitter, which involves publication of defamatory statements and content, and sharing such content with others by retweeting will surely attract liability since it would amount to posting defamatory content as one‟s own by believing it to be true and thus, sharing it with the public at large."

In the present case, Vikas Sankrityan, also known as Vikas Pandey, filed a case against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal regarding alleged defamation before the High Court. Pandey claimed to be a supporter of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the founder of the social media page 'I Support Narendra Modi.'

The dispute originated from a video posted by Dhruv Rathee, where he stated that Pandey, purportedly the second-in-command of the BJP IT cell, offered ₹50 lakh to Mahavir Prasad to retract accusations against the party's IT cell for spreading misinformation. Prasad made these allegations in an interview with Rathee.

Cause Title: Arvind Kejriwal v State (National Capital Territory of Delhi) and Anr.