May 30th 2024.
In a recent development, a Delhi court has adjourned the sentencing of Narmada Bachao Andolan activist Medha Patkar to June 7th. This comes after Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma of Saket Courts convicted her in a defamation case filed by Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena on May 24th. This legal battle between Patkar and Saxena has been ongoing for over twenty years, with Saxena being the head of the National Council for Civil Liberties when the disputes first began in 2000.
During the hearing on Thursday, both parties presented their arguments regarding the sentencing. The judge has now scheduled the next hearing for June 7th. In his written submission, Saxena has emphasized the need for the maximum punishment to be imposed on Patkar. He has cited various reasons to support his demand for a strict sentence.
Firstly, Saxena has brought to the court's attention Patkar's previous criminal history and antecedents, which he claims showcase a persistent disregard for the law that is characteristic of the accused. This is further supported by the Supreme Court's admonishment of the NBA (Narmada Bachao Andolan) for providing false pleadings. Saxena also stresses the gravity of the offence of defamation, equating it with moral turpitude. He argues that such a serious offence demands a stringent punishment, especially since there is no evidence to show that Patkar respects the law.
Saxena has also labeled Patkar as a habitual offender, citing another defamation case from 2006 that is still pending before the court. He claims that Patkar shows no regard for social norms and defies moral and ethical justifications, which are aggravating circumstances that indicate her culpability based on her past conduct and criminal history. He concludes his submission by stating that a deterrent punishment is necessary, and the maximum sentence should be imposed to set an example in society and discourage others from engaging in similar acts that hinder the country's development.
The defamation case dates back to 2000 when Patkar filed a suit against Saxena for publishing advertisements that she deemed defamatory towards her and the NBA. 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 issued by her. The magistrate, while convicting her, noted that Patkar had made and published imputations against Saxena, claiming that he had visited Malegao, praised the NBA, issued a cheque of Rs 40,000 from Lal Bhai Group, and that he was a coward and not a patriot. The magistrate further stated that Patkar had intended to harm Saxena's reputation by publishing such imputations.
During the hearing, advocates Gajinder Kumar, Kiran Jai, Chandra Shekhar, Drishti, and Somya Arya appeared for the L-G. The magistrate, while passing the order for her conviction, emphasized the value of one's reputation, stating that it affects both personal and professional relationships and can significantly impact an individual's standing in society.
In conclusion, the court has adjourned the sentencing of Medha Patkar to June 7th, and the arguments presented by both parties have highlighted the need for a strict punishment in this case. This legal battle, which began over two decades ago, is a reminder of the importance of upholding the law and respecting one's reputation.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
