New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing of a petition filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, challenging a Delhi High Court ruling that upheld the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case. The case stems from Kejriwal’s retweet of an allegedly defamatory video shared by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in May 2018.
Court Seeks Resolution
A three-judge bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Sanjay Kumar, and R. Mahadevan noted that the negotiations between the parties had not yet been concluded. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, requested the Supreme Court to grant more time for a possible settlement.
The counsel for the complainant, Vikas Sankrityayan, indicated that while additional time could be provided, it “cannot be unlimited.” The court, taking this into consideration, has scheduled the next hearing for six weeks later.
Background of the Case
The defamation case arose after Kejriwal retweeted a video posted by Dhruv Rathee in 2018. The video allegedly defamed the founder of an ‘X’ account titled “I Support Narendra Modi,” by comparing the account’s operator to the BJP IT Cell. This prompted the account’s founder, Vikas Sankrityayan, to file a defamation plea against the Delhi Chief Minister.
In February, the Supreme Court inquired whether Kejriwal would consider issuing an apology to settle the matter. Kejriwal admitted that retweeting the video was a mistake, and the bench asked whether the complainant would be open to a settlement given this admission.
High Court Ruling and Current Status
Earlier, on March 11, the Supreme Court asked Kejriwal if he would offer a public apology to the complainant. The complainant’s counsel suggested that an apology could be issued on social media platforms such as ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) or Instagram.
The Supreme Court also directed the trial court to pause any proceedings related to the defamation case against Kejriwal until further orders. This followed the Delhi High Court’s February 5 ruling, which stated that reposting potentially defamatory content could be grounds for defamation under the law. The High Court refused to dismiss the 2019 trial court order that summoned Kejriwal, emphasising the significant impact a public figure’s actions can have when they retweet or repost defamatory content.
The High Court highlighted that permitting the act of retweeting or reposting without accountability could embolden individuals with malicious intent to exploit this provision. These individuals could then argue that they were merely sharing existing content, thus evading responsibility for any defamatory implications.
Next Steps
The Supreme Court’s decision to adjourn the hearing for six weeks gives both parties more time to explore a settlement. The case underscores the legal responsibilities that come with sharing potentially defamatory content, particularly for public figures. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.