Court dismisses plea to prosecute AAP's Saurabh Bharadwaj for defamation

Special Judge Vishal Gogne rejected the petition filed by BJP's Suraj Bhan Chauhan against a trial court order which had earlier dismissed his complaint against Bhardwaj

A Delhi court on Saturday dismissed a plea filed by a BJP leader seeking prosecution of AAP's Saurabh Bharadwaj for allegedly making defamatory remarks against him in September 2018.

 

Special judge Vishal Gogne turned down the petition filed by BJP's Suraj Bhan Chauhan against a trial court's February 19 order which rejected his complaint against Bharadwaj, citing delay in filing it.

 

The limitation period was found to have lapsed on March 16, 2024, the court said while noting the magisterial court had already accorded the permissible liberal construction to the limitation period.

 

The court finds the conduct of Chauhan to have been "whimsical and opportunistic" in filing the belated defamation complaint, regarding the press conference of the year 2018, only in December 2024 against respondent Saurabh Bharadwaj on the cusp of the Delhi Assembly elections in early 2025, the judge said.

 

Chauhan had alleged that Bharadwaj defamed him in 2018 by falsely claiming at a press conference that an FIR had been lodged against him.

 

He claimed before the special judge that he had "inadvertently" filed the complaint against Bharadwaj, a former Delhi minister, before Saket court instead of Rouse Avenue Court which came up for hearing in September 2020.

 

He then withdrew the complaint from Saket in November 2022 and the present complaint case was consequently filed at Rouse Avenue Court on December 12, 2024, he said.

 

The judge, however, said that the magisterial court had already accorded the permissible liberal construction to the limitation period by excluding the long period from January 7, 2020, to July 1, 2022, when the cause of action itself arose on September 20, 2018.

 

The limitation period was found to have lapsed on March 16, 2024, the judge said, adding that Chauhan remained disinterested in pursuing his grievance and filed the complaint with a delay of 270 days, calculated from March 16, 2024.

 

"When the revisionist has not displayed conviction in his own remedy, it would be a case of misplaced deployment of the liberal approach for the court to defeat the substantial law of limitation," the judge said.

 

"The grounds urged in the revision petition have not been successful in establishing any illegality, error or impropriety in the impugned order. The revision petition is dismissed," the judge said.

 

A magisterial court had on February 19 dismissed Chauhan's plea, saying the alleged offence of defamation took place in September 2018 and observed the limitation period for filing the present complaint was three years.

 

None of the grounds, the magistrate said, pleaded by Chauhan to seek the condonation of delay were found justifiable.

 

"The complainant is not entitled to the condonation of delay in filing the present complaint. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed," it held.