E-Paper
SC refuses to dismiss Assam CM’s defamation case against Manish Sisodia
“If you reduce public debate to this level, you have to face the consequence,” the Supreme Court told Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia on Monday as it refused to quash a criminal defamation case against him filed by Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma
“If you reduce public debate to this level, you have to face the consequence,” the Supreme Court told Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia on Monday as it refused to quash a criminal defamation case against him filed by Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
“You should have unconditionally apologised but if you justify, then defend it in trial,” a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and AS Oka said.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Sisodia seeking quashing of proceedings against him when it made the remarks.
Sarma had filed the criminal defamation case against the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader after the latter accused him of corruption.
At a press conference in June, Sisodia alleged that Sarma, during the first wave of Covid-19 in March 2020, had given government contracts for supplying PPE kits at “higher than market rates” to firms run by his wife Riniki Bhuyan Sarma.
Sarma denied the “baseless” charges and filed the case against Sisodia.
Sisodia moved the high court after the chief judicial magistrate (CJM), Kamrup, in August asked him to appear before it on November 19. On November 4, the high court noted that the (CJM) found sufficient grounds to proceed against Sisodia and dismissed his plea to quash the proceedings, prompting him to move the Supreme Court.
The top court told Sisodia to be mindful of the situation that was facing the country when the contracts were placed by the Assam government. “All this happened in March 2020 in the middle of Covid-19. Instead of realising what the country was going through, you are making allegations,” the bench said.
“We will not interfere in such a scenario when somebody is trying to arrange something in an urgent situation. You are entitled to defend your statement,” it added.
Appearing for Sisodia, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said: “I have nowhere said you have taken money. In public life, some colour is required. I said the government’s purchase contract went to his wife. You are making a virtue out of necessity by making it a donation. These at best can be innuendos.”
To this, the bench said: “If it was just an innuendo, it could have gone away with the passage of time. But you are facing defamation.”
As the bench remained inclined to dismiss the petition, Singhvi said: “Any judgment from the Supreme Court becomes final. This is the highest court. I will withdraw.”
The court subsequently permitted Sisodia to withdraw the plea while recording his lawyer’s statement to raise all objections while appearing before the magistrate during the trial.
After the hearing, advocate Nalin Kohli, who was representing the Assam government, said: “Essentially, while issuing summons, a court has to see whether a prima facie case exists with regard to false imputations which are per se defamatory....”
Besides the criminal defamation suit, Sisodia is facing a civil defamation suit worth ₹100 crore filed by Riniki Bhuyan in June. She has denied any wrongdoing.
AAP leaders refused to comment on the matter.
