'It's Unjust To Continue Prosecution': SC Quashes Defamation Case Against Tejashwi Prasad Yadav As He Unconditionally Withdraws Statement Against Gujaratis
The Supreme Court quashed a defamation case against Tejashwi Prasad Yadav who was accused of defaming “the entire society of Gujarat.”
Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, the petitioner, had made a public statement on 22nd March 2023 which described all Gujarati people as “thugs”.
A complaint was filed against Yadav, who was the Deputy Chief Minister of Bihar at that time, for offences under Section 499 and Section 500 of the IPC for defaming the Gujarati people and the entire society of Gujarat.
According to the complaint, people from other societies had started looking upon Gujaratis as “crooks and criminals” after the words uttered by the petitioner were distributed in the media.
Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed, “It is clear that not only has the petitioner withdrawn the offending statements made by him based on which the complaint was filed, but he has also stated that he never intended to defame Gujaratis as a community. He has also stated that he holds Gujaratis as a community in great esteem.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal represented the petitioner, while Senior Advocate Rauf Rahim appeared for the respondent.
An affidavit was filed by the petitioner where he clarified that he was only answering questions related “the Red Corner notice issued against Mehul Choksi which has been revoked” and that he had no intentions to defame Gujaratis as a community.
In another affidavit filed, the petitioner withdrew the entire offending statement “I have clarified the intent of my statement made on 22.03.2023 and withdrawn it so that no Gujarati may feel defamed as alleged.”
The Court remarked, “The conjoint reading of the affidavits of the petitioner indicates that the statements made by the petitioner on the basis of which a complaint of defamation was filed, have been unconditionally withdrawn.”
The Court explained that prosecution for defamation under Section 499 and Section 500 of the IPC cannot be quashed simply on the ground that the offending allegations were withdrawn. However, in this case, the Supreme Court noted that the petitioner not only unconditionally withdrew the statements, but also explained the circumstances and the context in which the statements were made.
The Court held that “it is unjust to continue the prosecution. No purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution. Therefore, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts of the case, this is a fit case to quash the complaint.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court disposed of the petition.
Cause Title: Tejashwi Prasad Yadav v. Hareshbhai Pranshankar Mehta (2024 INSC 108)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, AOR Ajay Vikram Singh, Advocates Akhilesh Singh, Aparjita Jamwal, Navin Kumar, Pankaj Kumar, Priyanka Singh, Radika Goyal, Shubham Singh, Satiender Singh Bawa, Sumit Singh, and Varun Jain
Respondent: Senior Advocate Rauf Rahim, AOR Shekhar Kumar, Advocates Ali Asghar Rahim and Abhijit Rathod
