Supreme Court Gives Time To Parties To Consider Settlement In Defamation Case Against Arvind Kejriwal For Retweeting YouTuber Dhruv Rathee's Video Against BJP
Today, it was submitted before the Supreme Court that an option for settlement could be explored in the defamation complaint against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for retweeting a video of YouTuber Dhruv Rathee against the BJP.
The Bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta said, "Okay. Do the needful. Relist in the week commencing 12th of August, 2024."
Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manusinghvi appeared for Kejriwal.
Advocate Raghav Awasthi submitted before the Court that the possibility of an amicable settlement is being explored.
The Supreme Court had granted more time to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to issue an apology and decide on the words for the apology, while extending the interim order passed on February 26, 2024, directing the trial court at Rousse Avenue not to proceed with the trial.
The Court had also made observations indicating that it is not inclined to accept a legal submission made on behalf of Kejriwal relating to the complainant withdrawing an earlier complaint.
The Supreme Court previously had passed an interim order staying the trial pending before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Rousse Avenue Court, Delhi and recorded the Delhi Chief Minister's acceptance that he "made a mistake" by re-tweeting a video titled "BJP IT Cell Part 2" by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee, which resulted in the filing of the defamation complaint under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.
Kejriwal’s acceptance came when the bench categorically said that even retweeting has its consequences. The bench had 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.
Previously, by the impugned judgment, 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, "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 acknowledgement."
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. (SLP(Crl) No. 2413/ 2024)
