Delhi HC issued notice in Sandeep Dikshit’s defamation complaint against AAP leaders

A bench of justice Ravinder Dudeja sought Atishi and Singh’s response, and scheduled the next hearing for December 4

New Delhi

In his petition before the high court, the complainant asserted that the magistrate had wrongly dismissed his complaint at the “cognisance stage”. (Representative photo)

The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice in Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit’s petition challenging a trial court’s order declining to take cognisance of a defamation complaint filed against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislator Atishi and MP Sanjay Singh.

A bench of justice Ravinder Dudeja sought Atishi and Singh’s response, and scheduled the next hearing for December 4.

“Issue notice to the respondents, subject to the petitioner taking the requisite steps. List on December 4,” the court said in its order.

The complaint stemmed from a press conference held on December 26, 2024. Dikshit, who contested the February state assembly polls from the New Delhi constituency for the Indian National Congress (INC), claimed that Atishi and Singh accused him of conspiring with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—for crores of rupees—to sabotage the AAP’s chances in the elections.

In his defamation complaint, Dikshit alleged that the accusations were levelled without any material evidence, with an intention to not only harm his image but also mislead voters of Delhi, especially in the constituency where he was contesting.

However, the trial court in April declined to take cognisance of the complaint, remarking that the press conference and the statement were nothing more than a political discourse among rival and competing parties. Additional chief judicial magistrate Paras Dalal of the Rouse Avenue Court concluded that the statement was neither aimed at Dikshit nor was it defamatory.

The statement, judge Dalal said, was instead covered under the fundamental freedom of speech and expression, and a candidate could not be called to have defamed the other when presenting certain scenarios to win over the opposing candidate.

In his petition before the high court, Dikshit asserted that the magistrate had wrongly dismissed his complaint at the “cognisance stage” despite the existence of a “clear” “prima facie” evidence in the form of statements. It went on to add that the statements were specific, malicious and made before the elections to target him.