Retweeting Defamatory Content Amounts To Defamation: Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash Summons Against Arvind Kejriwal

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to quash the summons issued against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in a criminal defamation case for retweeting an allegedly defamatory video posted by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in 2018.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held that retweeting defamatory content will attract the offence of defamation under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The court upheld the summoning order passed by the Magistrate and the order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting Kejriwal's revision plea against the same.

Kejriwal had filed the petition in 2019. A coordinate bench had stayed trial court proceedings in the matter in December 2019.

The court held that online interaction on Twitter and sharing any posts with others by retweeting attracts the liability for the offence of defamation. It added that if Kejriwal wants to justify his act of retweeting the video, it can be done at the stage of trial.

Pronouncing the first judgment on the issue of criminal liability on retweeting, Justice Sharma held that even mere whisper, when echoed in cyber domain, magnifies to a great extent. 

The court also said that ramification is far more than whisper when a public figure tweets or retweets something on social media  

“When a public figure with a political standing tweets or retweets, defamatory post, the repercussions escalate given the broader implications on society. The audience therefore becomes a citizenry at large whose opinion may be influenced by the information they consume including the defamatory statement published on social media,” the court said.

It held that the concept of a publication, which was earlier limited to only printed material, must be examined in the context of virtual platforms and that the legal system must remain in tune with the social media.

It further held that some sense of responsibility must be attached while retweeting content on social media which the person does not have knowledge about. Retweeting must attract penal, civil as well as tort action, the court held.

It added that when retweeting is done by political persons, including a Chief Minister, with bigger social media presence, such retweet becomes public endorsement which can be believed by public at large.

The complaint against Kejriwal was filed by Vikas Sanskrityayan, founder of social media page, “I support Narendra Modi.” He claimed that the YouTube video titled “BJP IT Cell Part II” was circulated by Rathee and false and defamatory allegations were made in it.

It was his case that Kejriwal retweeted the video in question without checking for its authenticity.

The complainant alleged that the video was defamatory in nature and that Kejriwal's tweet had tarnished his reputation both in India and abroad. 

The Magistrate had summoned Kejriwal observing that that the post retweeted by him referred to the complainant and was prima facie defamatory.

Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. State & Anr. 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 136