Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Oct 21: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed on grounds of parity a petition filed by former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal, challenging the criminal defamation case against him over remarks he made about the educational qualifications of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
A Bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti said it had refused to entertain an identical petition filed by AAP leader Sanjay Singh who is Mr Kejriwal’s co-respondent in the defamation case, in August and thus, cannot now take a different approach with the former Chief Minister. “We should be consistent,” Justice Roy observed.
A Metropolitan court in Ahmedabad had earlier summoned Mr Kejriwal and Mr Singh in the defamation case filed by the registrar of the Gujarat University Piyush Patel over their alleged “sarcastic” and “derogatory” statements in connection with Mr Modi’s educational degrees.
The defamation case, filed by Gujarat University, stems from comments made by Mr Kejriwal in public and during press conferences, where he questioned the validity of Mr Modi’s academic credentials, specifically his degree from Gujarat University. These remarks were perceived by Gujarat University as derogatory and damaging to its reputation. Consequently, the university’s registrar Piyush Patel filed a criminal defamation suit against both Mr Kejriwal and AAP leader Sanjay Singh.
The case first took shape in 2016, when the Central Information Commission (CIC), in response to Mr Kejriwal’s demand for transparency, directed the Delhi University and Gujarat University to disclose details about PM Modi’s degree. However, in a counter-move, the Gujarat High Court set aside the CIC’s order in July 2016, preventing the release of the information.
Mr Kejriwal’s current plea to the Supreme Court came after the Gujarat High Court dismissed his earlier petition in February. He sought the quashing of the criminal defamation summons issued against him by a trial court in Gujarat, which had directed him to appear for questioning over his comments on PM Modi’s educational qualifications. His co-accused, Sanjay Singh, had also filed a similar plea challenging the proceedings.
The Supreme Court, however, did not look into the merits of the case and kept all the contentions open for Mr Kejriwal to raise in the trial court in his favour.
During the hearing Mr Kejriwal’s counsel, senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, said the defamation complaint did not satisfy the preliminary requirement under Section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That is, the aggrieved party had not lodged the defamation complaint. It was filed by the Gujarat University Registrar. Mr Singhvi said the remarks alleged to him were considered part of the “public discourse.” “Otherwise where is Article 19(1)(a)?” he asked.
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the University, said the certificate in question was published on the varsity website. “He is in the habit of making reckless, defamatory statements and then regretting them… He should be either circumspect or stand by them,” Mr Mehta said.
The Gujarat University Registrar had filed the defamation case in April, 2023, accusing the two AAP leaders of making “defamatory” statements at press conferences and on social media. The alleged comments had dented the prestige of the university, the complaint had said.
Acting on the complaint, the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Jayeshbhai Chovatiya had summoned the two AAP leaders last year after observing that prima facie there appeared to be a case against them under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 500 (defamation).
The court had recorded the statements of four witnesses and analysed the statements and social media posts of both accused and noted, “A normal person can conclude that it is being implied that Gujarat University issues fake and bogus degrees and is associated with fraud activity.” “This is the prima facie reasoning that can be concluded.”
The court has accepted the contention of the complainant that accused Mr Kejriwal made the statements in his “personal capacity” and therefore the court also ordered to delete ‘Chief Minister’ from Mr Kejriwal’s name in the cause title of the case.
In the complaint, the varsity has argued that the statements were made in their personal capacity and “not affairs of the State” as it was not part of their assigned duty to make such statements and since they were made in their “personal capacity,” there was no need to seek consent of the competent authority to sue a person holding a public office.
The court has accepted the contention and held that if political leaders holding public offices make such statements to cause damage to individuals or institutions, it was breach of trust that is posed in them by the people.
The court has also noted that the order of the High Court was clear that the Gujarat University had already published the Prime Minister’s degree on its website and still the accused sued held a press conference and made statements which were circulated on social media platforms.
In his complaint, the University’s Registrar has cited several statements of Mr Kejriwal and Sanjay Singh, describing them as “defamatory” in nature and were meant to lower the prestige of the institution and hurt its image.
“If the PM studied from Delhi University and Gujarat University, then Gujarat University should celebrate that their alumnus has become the Prime Minister and yet they are trying to hide and not disclosing the degree,” is one of the statements Mr Kejriwal had made and the University has cited in its complaint.
For Mr Singh, the complainant has cited cite his statement: “Prime Minister is putting his all to prove a fake degree as right” stating that the statement was intended to damage the reputation the institution, despite knowing that such remarks would be defamatory.
