The Delhi High Court on Friday asked Trinamool Congress Member of Parliament Mahua Moitra to submit the video recording of the incident where she called Zee News a thief, based on which a defamation case was filed against her (Mahua Moitra v State of NCT of Delhi and Anr)..Justice Mukta Gupta has also asked Moitra to submit a copy of her defamation case against Zee News and listed the case for further hearing on March 2. .The Court was hearing an application moved by Moitra in her challenge to the summoning order in Zee Media's criminal defamation case. The dispute arose when Chaudhary, in a broadcast on Zee News aired on July 2, 2019, alleged that a speech delivered by Moitra in Parliament on rising fascism in India was plagiarised from an article authored by Martin Longman which had appeared on an American website, Washington Monthly.Moitra said that her speech elaborated and explained in detail how the seven signs of fascism are applicable to the prevailing situation in India.The segment was aired despite Moitra expressly clarifying that the same was taken from a poster at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in America.While Moitra has filed a defamation case against Zee and anchor Sudhir Chaudhary for the broadcast, Zee filed a case against her for calling the news organization a thief..Appearing for Moitra, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the Court that after this broadcast, a Zee News reporter harassed the MP in the Parliament premises, repeatedly called her a thief, and shoved a mic in her face. He said that it was in response to this that she lost her cool and called them a thief. Sibal added that her action was not premeditated, and was a spur-of-the-moment reaction. In response to Justice Gupta’s question on whether Moitra having filed a case against Zee for calling her a thief is as much a defamation matter as Zee filing a case against her for the same, Sibal said that in Moitra's case it was a reaction even as the news channel ran an hour-long programme calling her a member of the ‘Tukde-Tukde Gang’ and levelling several other allegations.Sibal said that Moitra is protected under many judgments of the Supreme Court that hold that spur-of-the-moment reactions do not fall under defamation..Zee’s counsel, however, raised objections on the maintainability of the writ petition as well as the delay in filing the case.The Court has asked Sibal to respond on all the points raised by Zee’s counsel.