The Supreme Court of India recently issued a notice regarding a defamation case involving Delhi Chief Minister Atishi and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal. This development comes after the pair challenged a decision made by the Delhi High Court, which had refused to quash the defamation proceedings initiated against them by BJP leader Rajiv Babbar.
On Monday, a bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti called for responses from both the Delhi government and Babbar concerning the plea filed by Atishi and Kejriwal. In a significant move, the Supreme Court has temporarily stayed the trial court proceedings while the case is being reviewed.A
During the proceedings, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Atishi and Kejriwal, argued that the defamation suit was improperly filed. He contended that the case was initiated by Babbar, who acts as the authorized representative of the BJP in Delhi, but pointed out that the BJP at both the central and Delhi levels had not officially lodged any complaint. Singhvi emphasized that Babbar was not the individual whom his clients had allegedly defamed, raising questions about the legitimacy of the suit.
In contrast, senior advocate Sonia Mathur, representing Babbar, asserted that the defamation case was indeed filed on behalf of the BJP. This contradiction highlights the complexity surrounding the issue of who is entitled to file defamation claims on behalf of a political party.
The legal dispute stems from comments made by Atishi, Kejriwal, and other AAP leaders regarding the purported deletion of names from the voters’ list in Delhi. The Delhi High Court had previously ruled that the allegations made by the AAP leaders were, at first glance, defamatory and suggested a deliberate attempt to damage the reputation of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) while attempting to gain unfair political advantage. The court dismissed the plea submitted by Atishi, Kejriwal, former AAP Rajya Sabha member Sushil Kumar Gupta, and party leader Manoj Kumar, which sought to terminate the ongoing defamation proceedings in the trial court.
As the Supreme Court now deliberates on the matter, the implications of its decision could significantly affect the political landscape in Delhi, particularly regarding the ongoing tensions between the AAP and the BJP. The legal principles surrounding defamation, especially in the context of political discourse, will be at the forefront as both parties await the court’s respons
