It Is A Metaphor Pointing Out Invincibility Of The Person: SC Says While Staying Defamation Case Against Shashi Tharoor For Scorpion On Shivling Remarks Against PM Modi

The Supreme Court today stayed the defamation proceedings against Congress MP Shashi Tharoor over his "scorpion on Shivling" remark allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Tharoor was supposed to appear before trial court today as per the Delhi High Court's order. However, now the proceedings have been stayed until further order.

The Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice R Mahadevan said, "Issue notice, returnable in four weeks. Further proceedings, in the impugned judgment are stayed till further orders."

At the outset, the Counsel appearing for Tharoor submitted, "I seek your Lordships, indulgence on three grounds: 1) The High Court has expanded the definition of a 'person aggrieved' to an unsustainable limit; 2) A political party; does it constitute a determinate class for the purposes of defamation; and 3) Can the statement that was not originally defamatory acquire a defamatory character after almost half a decade?"

The Counsel then took the Bench through the facts of the case. He submitted that a leading magazine carried an article about the then Chief Minister of Gujarat; it was published on 1 March, 2012. Thereafter he submitted, that Tharoor wrote a book in 2018; it was primarily an academic work.

"It cites sources and goes to the background of history of the PM, before he became the Prime Minister. It is primarily a biographical work in some context. The book was published on October 26, 2018. Two days thereafter, at the Bangalore Literary Fest, I (Tharoor) talked about this," he submitted.

The Counsel quoted the relevant portion: "Mr. Modi is like a scorpion sitting on a shivlinga, you cannot remove him with your hand, and you cannot hit it with a chappal (footwear),..so ultimately you live with it..."

Justice Roy said, "Eventually it is a metaphor, I have tried to understand. It is pointing out the invincibility of the person. Can the metaphor not be understood as something pointing at the invincibility of the person."

The Counsel submitted, "I would take it to mean, Can't live with, can't live without."

"No, no. That's ok. Metaphor can be understood in a different fashion, but it is basically a figure of speech that uses words and phrases, are applied to objects and action. It has no relationship with the actual object and action. That's what the metaphor is all about...Metaphor is capable of telling the view of the truth, or the view of the author, by occupying the least space. As they would say, a picture can depict 1000 words, which words may not. A metaphor is good enough to substitute a thousand words. I don't know why somebody has taken an objection here," Justice Roy said.

The Court said, "That the complaint against petitioner was filed in connection with his utterances on 20.10.2018, where petitioner made a reference to the statement published 6 years, earlier in The Caravan magazine. None had any grievance to the article and the uttered sentence, as published in The Caravan magazine. However, when the petitioner said that it was an 'extraordinary striking metaphor', the same was perceived to be a defamatory article by respondent No. 2. He filed a complaint alleging an offense under S.499 and 500 of the IPC. In the complaint itself, Respondent No. 2 had indicated that he was aware of remarks published in 2012... but the same were of no consequence then."

"..because of the passage of time and growing popularity of the BJP and PM Modi, the petitioner deliberately dug out the statement and made it relevant for today. The High Court stayed the proceedings in 2020, but under the impugned judgment. The High Court opined that no ground was made out for quashing. It is submitted that defamatory imputation should be considered by the trial court, and accordingly, a direction was issued by it to the petitioner to appear before the trial court on September 10," the Court said.

Furthermore, the Bench noted, "The Counsel argues that Respondent No. 2 cannot be said to be an aggrieved person under S.199 CrPC. He also submits present is a case where concerned statement would fall within exception clause (8) and (9) u/s 499 IPC. He says statement can be considered to be made in good faith and should not be construed as defamatory statement. Likewise, the members of a political party cannot also be said to be an aggrieved party vis-a-vis the comments attributed."

Accordingly, the Court issued notice to the respondents and stayed the defamation proceedings before the trial court. The matter is scheduled for hearing after four weeks.

Pertinently, on August 29, the Delhi High Court had dismissed Tharoor's plea in which he had challenged the defamation proceedings against him launched on a complaint by a BJP leader over his "scorpion on Shivling" remark allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Bench had said, "No grounds are made out for quashing the proceedings at this stage under Section 482 CrPC. It is in the interest of justice to permit the proceeding before the learned trial court to continue." The Court had also said that the defence that the defamatory implications are covered by the exception of Section 499 IPC needs to be considered on the basis of evidence in its entirety.