Delhi HC asks Satyendar Jain to approach trial court in defamation case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain to approach the trial court to challenge the proceedings against him in a criminal defamation complaint filed by Delhi BJP leader

Satyendar Jain
Satyendar Jain | Photo: ANI
Press Trust of India New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Nov 30 2022 | 6:25 PM IST

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain to approach the trial court to challenge the proceedings against him in a criminal defamation complaint filed by Delhi BJP leader Chhail Bihari Goswami.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma allowed the AAP leader to withdraw his plea challenging the orders by a magisterial court here and granted him liberty to approach the trial court by way

of a revision petition instead of approaching the high court.

"File a revision petition. Why to lose one forum? the judge said.

Senior advocate Rebecca John, appearing for Jain, said the petitioner filed the plea because no case was made out to proceed against him as his alleged statements do not fulfil the ingredients to constitute the offence of defamation.

Goswami had filed a defamation complaint against Jain and several other AAP leaders, claiming the accused had levelled defamatory remarks against him in connection with funds of the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC).

Goswami, who was the chairperson of the Standing Committee of the NDMC, alleged the accused passed the remarks to lower the moral and intellectual character of the complainant in the eyes of the general public.

In February, the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had summoned Jain, Atishi, Raghav Chadha, Sourabh Bharadwaj, and Durgesh Pathak on the criminal defamation complaint.

The court is of the considered view that prima facie accused persons namely Satyendar Jain, Atishi Marlena, Raghav Chadha, Durgesh Pathak, and Sourabh Bharadwaj have committed the offence punishable under Section 499/500 (defamation) IPC read with Section 34 (common intention) IPC, it had said.

In November, the magisterial court had dismissed Jain's plea seeking discharge in the case.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :Satyendar JainDelhi High CourtDefamation case

First Published: Nov 30 2022 | 6:25 PM IST

Next Story