Historian and VD Savarkar's biographer, Vikram Sampath, has approached the Delhi High Court seeking ₹2 crores in damages from three historians who have accused him of plagiarism [Dr. Vikram Sampath v Dr. Audrey Truschke and Ors]..Sampath has also sought permanent injunction on publication of the letter dated February 11 written by historians Audrey Truschke, Ananya Chakravarti and Rohit Chopra to Emma Griffin, President of Royal Historical Society (RHS) in Britain. In the letter, Truschke and others had alleged that they had found a “pervasive, long-standing pattern of plagiarism” in the work Sampath who was recently elected as a member to the Society..The petition will be heard by single-judge Justice Amit Bansal on Friday. .The plea also has tech journalist Abhishek Baxi, Professor Ashok Swain, Twitter and Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology as respondents.Baxi and Swain had tweeted the same letter from their handles..In his suit, Sampath has argued that the charges of plagiarism against him “falls completely flat and is very clearly libelous” and “the same is being done as part of an international smear campaign in order to discredit the plaintiff because he has shown the academic courage and gumption to challenge the prevailing narrative around a historical figure like Sh. VD Savarkar.” “This is evident from the fact that in all the instances of plagiarism that are being cited here there is not one wherein the Plaintiff' is not guilty of attributing the source material to the original author,” the suit read..The plea further stated that the letter in question was being quoted and shared extensively on twitter which made it clear that there was a motivated smear campaign against him.“That it is further most humbly submitted that for an academician, the Plaintiff's only capital is his professional reputation and if this hit job is allowed to stand then what it would imply is that there would be damage done to the Plaintiff that cannot be compensated in terms of money. This is not at the first instance for beseeching the Hon’ble Court for relief. As ardent votaries of free speech, the Plaintiff has allowed for the last 5 months, since October 2021, several individuals to make malicious, defamatory statements against him and chosen to respond to that in the best interests of everyone's free speech. This libellous content over 5 months has already caused considerable damage to Plaintiff's reputation, works and career,” the suit stated.It added that there is a systematic pattern of maligning for vested and ideological reasons. "Why this instance is the last straw on the camel's back is it prejudices the plaintiff irrevocably especially in academic circles where plagiarism is viewed very seriously. This would close all doors forever in academic careers, possibly cancel his Fellowship at the Royal Historical Society and also force many publishers to withdraw his books and cancel future contracts. In effect, if this letter is allowed to go free pass, then it will permanently destroy the Plaintiff's career and reputation built painstakingly over 15 years. Hence despite being champions of free speech the plaintiff is constrained to seek an immediate injunction,” it was contended.