Delhi Court Clears Lieutenant Governor in Decades-Old Defamation Case
A Delhi court on Thursday acquitted Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena in a criminal defamation case that had been pending for 25 years. The case was originally filed by prominent social activist Medha Patkar, who leads the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA). The court ruled that Patkar failed to substantiate her allegations against Saxena.
Background of the Legal Dispute
The legal battle between Patkar and Saxena dates back to the year 2000. At that time, Medha Patkar initiated a lawsuit against V K Saxena for publishing an advertisement in The Indian Express newspaper. The advertisement, which appeared on November 10, 2000, carried the headline 'The True Face of Medha Patkar and her Narmada Bachao Andolan'.
This advertisement was published by the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), an organization where Saxena served as president during that period. In her complaint, Patkar alleged that the advertisement contained specific and defamatory statements against her personally.
One of the key allegations mentioned in the advertisement was that "NBA is passing confidential documents related to projects of national importance to foreign people with the sole objective to halt the progress of the nation." Patkar claimed these statements damaged her reputation and sought legal recourse.
Court's Detailed Reasoning for Acquittal
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Raghav Sharma of Saket court delivered the verdict after examining all evidence and arguments. The magistrate stated clearly that "the complainant has failed to establish that the accused published any imputation concerning the complainant personally in the said advertisement with an intent to harm or with the knowledge that it would harm her reputation."
The court made several important observations in its detailed order:
- The advertisement, when read in its entirety, contained criticism directed primarily against the Narmada Bachao Andolan as an organization
- Specific allegations were made against named individuals like Chitrupa Palit, another NBA activist
- Patkar's name appeared only in the heading of the advertisement, with no direct reference to her in the body where substantive allegations were detailed
JMFC Sharma further elaborated that "the accused has sought to criticise the functioning of the NBA by attributing certain acts to that organization." These included not only the alleged passing of confidential documents to foreign individuals but also claims about non-registration of NBA to avoid financial disclosure and alleged receipt of funds through hawala channels.
The magistrate emphasized that "each of these imputations is explicitly made qua the NBA" rather than targeting Patkar in her individual capacity. The court noted that documents presented during the trial concerned the internal workings of NBA and its associates, not Patkar personally.
Contradictions in Patkar's Testimony
The court identified what it described as "irreconcilable contradictions" in Medha Patkar's case. During proceedings, Patkar initially acknowledged the existence and authorship of a letter by Chitrupa Palit and justified it as NBA's document related to 'risk analysis' disclosure.
However, during cross-examination, she reportedly "pleaded complete ignorance" about the same document. This inconsistency in her testimony weakened her case significantly according to the court's assessment.
Legal Representation and Related Case
V K Saxena was represented in court by a team of advocates including Gajinder Kumar, Kiran Jai, Chandra Shekhar, Drishti and Somya Arya. Their arguments focused on establishing that the advertisement criticized the organization rather than Patkar personally.
Interestingly, this verdict comes just days after another related development. On January 24, Medha Patkar was herself acquitted in a separate criminal defamation case filed against her by V K Saxena in 2006. That case alleged that during a live television program, Patkar had made defamatory statements against Saxena regarding contracts related to the Sardar Sarovar Project.
The simultaneous resolution of these two long-standing legal disputes marks the conclusion of a quarter-century legal saga between the prominent activist and the current Lieutenant Governor of Delhi.
