Medha Patkar defamation case: SC confirm activist's conviction in defamation case by VK Saxena; sets aside Rs 1 lakh penalty
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday confirmed activist Medha Patkar's conviction in a defamation case filed by Delhi lieutenant governor VK Saxena. The top court set aside a penalty of Rs 1 lakh imposed on Medha Patkar in the case.
On April 23 this year, a Delhi court issued a non-bailable warrant against activist Medha Patkar, observing that she was deliberately flouting its sentencing order to submit probation bonds and Rs 1 lakh as fine in Saxena's 2001 defamation case.
Additional sessions judge Vishal Singh observed that instead of appearing before the court to comply with the sentencing of April 8, the 70-year-old social activist had remained absent and deliberately failed to comply with the order to avail of the benefit of probation subject to furnishing the compensation amount.
"The intention of the convict is apparent. She is deliberately violating the court order; she is avoiding appearing before the court and also avoiding accepting the terms of the sentence passed against her," the judge said on Wednesday.
On April 8, the sessions court had released Patkar on "probation for good conduct" in the defamation case against Saxena, who headed an NGO in Gujarat in 2001. The sessions court modified the order of a magisterial court on July 1, 2024, sentencing her to five months of simple imprisonment.
It asked her to deposit compensation of Rs 1 lakh, which was to be released to Saxena.
Two days later, on April 25, Delhi Police arrested Patkar. However, the Delhi high court, the same afternoon, deferred till May 20 the sentence of Patkar.
In July, the Delhi high court upheld the conviction and punishment awarded to activist Medha Patkar and noted that the trial court order, against which Patkar approached the high court, did not require any interference as the challenge was "more in the nature of hair-splitting and hinged on technicalities."
The high court pointed out that in the appeal, Patkar did not even refer to the text and context of the defamatory press note that had triggered the defamation suit as it alleged Saxena was "mortgaging" the people of Gujarat and their resources to foreign interests, prompting the trial court to declare it a direct attack on his integrity and public service.
"The record suggests that the essential ingredients of Section 499 of the IPC are clearly made out. The imputations made were specific, published in the public domain, and caused harm to the reputation of the respondent," the high court noted in its order, saying it found no illegality in the conclusions reached by the trial court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Court says Aadhaar not conclusive citizenship proof, flags ‘trust deficit'
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said there appeared to be a 'trust deficiency' surrounding the Election Commission of India's (ECI) special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, even as it backed the poll body's stand that possession of an Aadhaar card cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship. The court was hearing multiple petitions challenging ECI's June 24 directive ordering an SIR ahead of the upcoming Bihar assembly polls (HT File) A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said the first question to be settled was whether ECI had the legal authority to carry out the exercise. 'If they don't have the power, everything ends. But if they have the power, there cannot be a problem. You will have to then tell us about the process,' observed the bench, adding that the court would not hesitate to strike down the entire process if it found that ECI lacked such authority or if 'gross illegality' was detected even after the final rolls were published. The court was hearing multiple petitions challenging ECI's June 24 directive ordering an SIR ahead of the upcoming Bihar assembly polls. Petitioners , which include non-governmental organisations, political leaders and activists, have alleged that the process, if left unchecked, could disenfranchise millions of legitimate voters and undermine free and fair elections. During the hearing, the court remarked: 'This is largely a case of trust deficiency, nothing else.' The bench asked ECI to be prepared with detailed facts and figures, including the number of voters before SIR, the tally of voters declared dead earlier and now, and data on inclusions and exclusions. ECI defended its decision, citing demographic changes, urban migration, and the need to remove inaccuracies from rolls that have not undergone intensive revision for nearly two decades. It maintained that it has plenary powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 to carry out SIR. In its latest affidavit filed on August 9, the Commission stressed that the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 do not require it to prepare or publish a separate list of the nearly 6.5 million persons not included in the draft rolls, or to state the reasons for each non-inclusion. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Rashtriya Janata Dal parliamentarian Manoj Jha, alleged that even voters who had participated in multiple past elections were missing from the draft rolls, with some alive voters recorded as dead. He argued that the requirement to re-submit forms, even for those in the 2003 rolls with no change in address, could lead to unjustified exclusions. Appearing for Trinamool Congress lawmaker Mahua Moitra and some others, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that there is a presumption of citizenship and highlighted the short time period within which the entire process is taking place just ahead of the elections. He further submitted that millions of people cannot be declared invalid on the basis of presumption. Activist and psephologist Yogendra Yadav called SIR 'the largest exercise of disenfranchisement in history,' claiming the exclusions could cross one crore and disproportionately affect women -- 3.1 million women versus 2.5 million men, according to his figures. He said the process had resulted in 'zero additions' to the rolls, turning it into 'an exercise in intensive deletion.' Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), questioned why the draft roll, searchable online until August 4, was later made non-searchable. He also alleged that Block Level Officers had rejected 10-12% of applications without recorded reasons. During the hearing, the bench did not agree with the assertion that most people in Bihar lacked the documents required for verification, pointing to the availability of family registers, pension cards and other papers. On Aadhaar, the court observed: 'ECI is correct in saying Aadhaar can't be accepted as conclusive proof of citizenship; it has to be verified. See Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act.' This provision states that Aadhaar is only proof of identity, and not of citizenship. While acknowledging that errors were inevitable in such a large-scale exercise, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing ECI, said these could be corrected before the final roll is published on September 30. He noted that around 65 million people did not need to submit documents because they or their parents were in the 2003 rolls. The court will continue hearing the matter on Wednesday. The petitions by ADR and others challenge ECI's June 24 notification initiating SIR under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The petitioners argue that the ECI's demand for only 11 specified documents, such as birth or matriculation certificates, passport, domicile certificate, etc, as proof of citizenship lacks statutory basis. They further claim that this restrictive documentation requirement could disenfranchise a large number of legitimate voters, especially those from marginalised communities. SIR has become a major political flashpoint ahead of the Bihar assembly elections scheduled for later this year. Opposition parties in the INDIA bloc staged protests in Parliament and wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla seeking a special discussion. The government has dismissed the protests and said that infiltrators cannot have the right to vote. On July 28, the top court had refused to stay the publication of the draft rolls but reminded ECI that the SIR must promote inclusion, not mass exclusion.
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC relief for ELV owners, to examine its 2018 order
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed no coercive action to be taken against those driving 10-year-old diesel and 15-year-old petrol vehicles in Delhi, effectively staying the implementation of its own October 2018 order which signed off on a 2014 order of the National Green Tribunal seeking to keep polluting vehicles off the roads in an attempt to combat the Capital's noxious air. Soon after coming to power in Delhi, the BJP government of the UT decided to deny fuel supply to end-of-life vehicles, which have crossed the threshold of 10 and 15 years operating on diesel and petrol. (Arvind Yadav/HT PHOTO) The 2014 and 2018 orders were never strictly enforced, and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which came to power this year in the Union territory, and which made pollution one of its campaign issues, sought to do so in April 2025 by denying fuel to overage vehicles — only to face significant pushback from people. The Delhi government, on July 25, then challenged the ban as unscientific and said a vehicle's fitness should be based on its emission level, and not age. A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai, justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria said, 'In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the owners of cars on the ground that they are 10 years old in respect of diesel and 15 years in respect of petrol vehicles.' The court issued notice on the Delhi government's application and posted the matter after four weeks. Solicitor general Tushar Mehta appeared for the Delhi government and sought urgent orders on the application claiming that the police is duty bound to act under the ban imposed by the court. 'Let there be no coercive action. Otherwise, police is under an obligation to take action against these vehicles,' Mehta said. There were similar applications moved by residents in Delhi and transport unions aggrieved by the ban. The court agreed to examine the issue. The order under challenge was passed by the top court on October 29, 2018 upholding the initial orders passed in this regard by the National Green Tribunal. The BJP-led government in Delhi said it was constrained to approach the top court considering the practical difficulties faced by the citizens in the Capital. The application filed last month said, 'To tackle the issue of pollution in the NCR region, a comprehensive policy is required which gives vehicle fitness based on the actual emission levels of an individual vehicle as per scientific methods rather than implementing a blanket ban based solely on the age of the vehicle.' The government also raised a public interest concern. It said, 'The directive to off road vehicles purely on the basis of age disproportionately affects middle-class citizens whose vehicles are less used, well-maintained, and compliant to fuel norms. It is submitted that the studies indicate that these vehicles often have significantly lower annual mileage and contribute negligibly to overall emissions.' It further stated that implementation of the court's order 'negatively affects' the market of second-hand cars, which alone is affordable by the poor and lower middle income class families residing in the region. Soon after coming to power in Delhi, the BJP government of the UT decided to deny fuel supply to end-of-life vehicles, which have crossed the threshold of 10 and 15 years operating on diesel and petrol. This decision was to be implemented from July 1. However, within days of implementation, the government sensed public sentiment and put its decision on hold. The application by the government acknowledged that the ban had a salutary aim in curbing pollution in Delhi over the past seven years. However, it said that the same was passed when Bharat Stage IV (BS-IV) emission standards were in force. Since April 2020, it added, Bharat Stage VI (BS-VI) has been implemented, which has much stricter and advanced norms. 'If the order of this court dated October 29, 2018 continues to operate, it will result in road worthy, non-polluting BS-VI vehicles also going off the roads in a matter of a few years without a scientific basis for the same…there does not appear to be a scientific basis for mandating that even BS-IV vehicles which meet PUC norms should be taken off the roads in Delhi NCR. These are serious issues which may require a fresh scientific evaluation,' the application said. The government's application said no data-based evidence currently exists to establish that all diesel vehicles older than 10 years or petrol vehicles older than 15 years are uniformly polluting. Instead, it said that the road-worthiness of a vehicle which is a technical and scientific issue must be linked to actual emissions as tested and recorded by mechanisms set out under the Motor Vehicles Act, the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, as opposed to a blanket ban on the basis of age which is unlinked to actual emissions. Prior to the SC order, the NGT had in November 2014 directed that all diesel vehicles (heavy or light) which are over 10 years old and petrol vehicles more than 15 years old will not be permitted to ply on Delhi roads. These orders were challenged multiple times before the top court which refused to interfere. On October 29, 2018, the court while considering the 92nd Report of the erstwhile Environmental Pollution Control Authority (now replaced by CAQM) accepted the suggestions of the amicus curiae endorsing the NGT order of November 2014. CAQM had used the VAHAN database to estimate 6.2 million ELVs (end of life vehicles) in Delhi, including 4.1 million two-wheelers and 1.8 million four-wheelers. However, government officials later clarified that this number includes vehicles that are already scrapped, de-registered, or issued no-objection certificates to be sold outside the NCR. A senior official familiar with the data said the actual number of ELVs still operating on Delhi roads is likely closer to 600,000—just 10% of the figure cited by CAQM. Delhi's total vehicle population is around 8.1 million, according to the Delhi Statistical Handbook 2024.
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
CBI arrests two senior CPWD engineers for taking bribe
Five persons, including two senior engineers of the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), were arrested by the CBI on Monday for allegedly taking bribes to clear pending bills of a private contractor involved in executing works at Chanakyapuri in Delhi. Four more engineers, who have been booked, are being questioned, the central agency said. The CBI identified the arrested persons as Jai Prakash, executive engineer (Civil); Prabhat Chaurasiya, assistant engineer (Civil); as well as Shubham Goel, and his father Rajesh Goel, the owner of Shubham Electricals. 'The CBI registered a case on August 11 against 12 persons, including the four arrested accused. The agency had received information that Shubham would be paying a bribe of Rs 6 lakh to Jai Prakash on August 11. Accordingly, a trap was laid and both were caught along with money,' a CBI spokesperson said, adding that CPWD has awarded multiple contracts to Shubham Electricals. The agency said that searches were conducted at 10 places during which Rs 55 lakh in cash was recovered. The CBI alleged in the FIR that on August 1, it received a tip-off stating that Shubham has informed his father that CPWD has sought a payment of Rs 1.52 crore against some of the company's pending bills. He also allegedly asked Rajesh on how much bribe money is to be given to various CPWD officers. 'His father directed that 3% of total bill is to be given to the executive engineer, 2% to the assistant engineer and the junior engineer, 1% to the CPWD accounts section, 1% to computer operators and clerks, and rest 1-2% to the superintending engineer for the award of the tender,' the FIR stated. It accused CPWD engineers of taking bribes from private contractors engaged in executing works in Chanakyapuri in lieu of extending undue favours in awarding contracts, allowing poor quality construction materials and clearing inflated bills, as well as causing wrongful loss to government exchequer.
