May 24th 2024.
On Friday, a Delhi court convicted activist Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan in a defamation case filed by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, VK Saxena. This decision is a significant moment in a legal battle that has been ongoing for over 20 years between Patkar and Saxena, who was also the Chairman of the Khadi and Village Industries Commission.
The defamation case stems from a series of disputes that began in 2000, when Patkar filed a suit against Saxena for publishing advertisements that she claimed were defamatory towards her and the NBA. At the time, Saxena was the head of the Ahmedabad-based NGO, National Council for Civil Liberties. In response, Saxena filed two defamation cases against Patkar - one for derogatory remarks she made about him during a television appearance and the other for a press statement she issued.
Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma of Saket Courts acknowledged that Patkar had made and published statements accusing Saxena of visiting Malegao, praising NBA, issuing a cheque from Lal Bhai Group, and being a coward and unpatriotic. The judge noted that these statements were intended to harm Saxena's reputation and that Patkar knew or had reason to believe that they would cause harm.
Representing the L-G in court were advocates Gajinder Kumar, Kiran Jai, Chandra Shekhar, Drishti, and Somya Arya, while advocate Sridevi Pannikar represented Patkar. Although the judge convicted Patkar, he also made some observations about the importance of reputation and the impact of defamatory statements.
Judge Sharma emphasized that a person's reputation is a valuable asset that can affect both personal and professional relationships and significantly impact their standing in society. He also stated that Patkar's statements calling Saxena a coward and not a patriot, and accusing him of involvement in hawala transactions, were not only defamatory but also designed to incite negative perceptions.
Moreover, the judge pointed out that Patkar's accusation that Saxena was mortgaging the resources of Gujarat to foreign interests was a direct attack on his integrity and public service. He further stated that the complainant's testimony, supported by the statements of two witnesses, showed that the defamatory statements made by Patkar not only questioned Saxena's integrity and patriotism but also falsely associated him with activities that went against his public stance.
According to the court's judgement, Patkar failed to provide any evidence to disprove these accusations or to show that she did not intend or foresee the harm they would cause. The court order also noted that the resulting inquiries and doubts raised among Saxena's acquaintances, as well as the shift in perception highlighted by the witnesses, demonstrate the significant damage to his reputation.
Judge Sharma concluded that it was evident from the evidence that Patkar's actions were deliberate and malicious, aimed at tarnishing Saxena's good name and causing substantial harm to his standing and credit in the eyes of the public. He stated that Patkar had committed an offence punishable under Section 500 of the IPC and therefore, convicted her of the same.
In conclusion, the judgement emphasized the importance of upholding one's reputation and the consequences of making defamatory statements. It also highlighted the malicious intent behind Patkar's actions and the significant harm they caused to Saxena's standing in society.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
