MP High Court Denies Relief To Ex-CM Digvijay Singh In Defamation Complaint Over His Alleged 'RSS/BJP-Pakistan's Detectives' Remark

The case in brief

Essentially, a private complaint was filed by the respondent/Awdhesh Singh under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior stating therein that he is an Advocate by profession and a worker of Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh and also inviting member of Bhartiya Janta Party.

It was further alleged in the complaint that on August 31, 2019, Digvijay Singh-Petitioner, falsely blamed the workers of RSS and BJP for being the detectives of Pakistan and that he also said that the persons who are working for ISI and got arrested were mostly non-muslims.

The complaint further alleged that the statement was defamatory and caused a significant dent to the image of the workers of RSS and BJP, of which, he (Awdhesh Singh) was a member.

The complaint was registered on June 20, 2022, vide an order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior. On November 22, 2022, Special Judge, MP/MLA Court, Gwalior, took cognizance of the complaint filed by the respondent alleging the commission of an offence under Section 500 of IPC against him.

Now, challenging both these orders, Digvijay Singh approached the Court primarily on the ground that the June 20, 2022 order of the JMFC (to register the defamation complaint) was passed without any application of mind as the complaint was not maintainable at the behest of the respondent, an advocate by profession.

In this regard, it was submitted that since the alleged statement was against BJP/RSS, the complaint should have been filed by the Organization or by the President and Secretary of the said Organization and that an individual cannot come forward to represent those Organizations as he is not an aggrieved person.

It was the further argument of the Senior Counsel appearing for Singh that no enquiry had been conducted by the Magistrate as per the requirement of Section 202 of CrPC (before registering the complaint) against him, who was residing out of the territorial jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

High Court’s observations

At the outset, the bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi noted that since the case of the respondent/complainant was that Digvijay Singh’s statement was not only against an organization but also against a community not belonging to Muslims (including Hindus) and since the complainant is a Hindu and is related to the RSS and BJP and his image and feelings, directly or indirectly got damaged, therefore, the Court observed, he can be said to be an aggrieved person.

“From the perusal of the statement of the present petitioner, I am of the opinion that the complaint at the behest of the respondent/complainant was maintainable because the statement is not confined to the political party but it is also against the person other than the Muslim community belonging to the said Organization.”

Regarding the second contention of the petitioner that the mandatory requirement of conducting an enquiry was not followed in respect of the petitioner, the Court, observed thus:

“In my opinion, recording the statement of the complainant is also sort of an enquiry envisaged under Section 202 of CrPC. Here in this case, not only the complainant but other witnesses have also been recorded and thereafter the Court registered the offence and issued summons to the petitioner. Therefore, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong and illegality committed by the Court below.”

The Court further noted that the Court below not only assigned reasons but also applied its mind regarding the ingredients of Section 499 of IPC, and therefore, the orders impugned did not require any interference.

In view of the discussions described above, the petition filed by Digvijay Singh was dismissed.

Appearances

Counsel for the petitioner: Senior Advocate Ajay Gupta assisted by Advocate Rajeev Mishra

Counsel for the respondent: Advocate Amit Dubey