Delhi court summons Delhi BJP Chief Adesh Gupta in defamation suit by Raghav Chadha, Delhi Jal Board

A Delhi court on Thursday issued summons to Delhi BJP president Adesh Gupta and other partymen in a defamation suit filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Raghav Chadha and the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) [Delhi Jal Board & Anr. v. Adesh Gupta & Ors.].The summons was issued by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dharmender Singh, Rouse Avenue, who listed the matter for further hearing on November 27, 2021. BJP MLAs Ramvir Singh Bidhuri (Badarpur), Vijendra Gupta (Rohini) and spokesperson Harish Khurana were also named and issued summons in the matter. .In the plea, it was stated that the Delhi Jal Board is functioning diligently and sincerely to provide services in the area of NCT of Delhi, and that AAP MLA Raghav Chadha has always worked for public welfare and due to his honesty, sincerity and competency has gained good name in the society and enjoys a good reputation..The allegations against the BJP leaders are that they held a press conference on January 21, 2021 in which they made allegations against the complainants by stating that they have committed a scam of ₹26,000 crore. While doing so, they called the Delhi Jal Board ‘Dalali Jal Board’.During this press conference, a statement was made alleging that Arvind Kejriwal has scammed everyone with the help of MLAs Raghav Chadha and Satyender Jain..A second press conference was also held, in furtherance of a common intention of defaming the complainants, on January 23, 2021, where the respondent, inter alia said that the DJB was going from bad to worse and that in the corrupt rule of the AAP, the Board has become pauper. .Press releases of these statements were issued and the respondents also made defamatory statements on social and print media, the complainants alleged..The complainants claim that wrong and false assertions made by the respondents in the said press conferences were also mounted in numerous part of Delhi in the form of huge hoardings, to defame the complainants..Since one of the parties to the present defamation suit is an institution, and not a natural person, the question before the Court was that 'whether a juridical person can file a complaint for defamation?'The Court placed reliance on Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, in which the Supreme Court had held that Section 11 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) describes “person” to mean a company or an association or collection of persons as such or body of persons, whether incorporated or not. Therefore, the inclusive nature of the definition indicates that juridical persons like a water supply agency can come within its ambit..In light of Section 11 and explanation 2 of Section 499 IPC (defamatory imputation concerning a company or an association) along with apex court precedents, the Court held that a complaint for defamation can be filed by the Delhi Jal Board. .The Court, after noting the submissions of the witnesses and the press releases, was of the view that the said statements have been made in furtherance of a common intention, and hence chargeable under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.On the question of summoning a person as accused in a complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court relied on Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi wherein the had Supreme Court held that at the stage of issuing process, the Magistrate is mainly concerned with the allegations made in the complaint and he is only to be prima facie satisfied whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused..Accordingly, the Court was of the view that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the respondents. The Court thus, issued summons to the respondents, as accused under offences punishable under Section 500 (punishment for defamation) and Section 34 of the IPC..[Read Order]