Retweeting can invite defamation: What Delhi High Court said while rejecting plea by Arvind Kejriwal

In a significant judgement on defamation law, the Delhi High Court on Monday held that retweeting/reposting of defamatory content on social media will attract the offence of defamation including criminal defamation [Arvind Kejriwal v State & Anr]..Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that there is a legal vacuum on the aspect of whether retweeting amounts to defamation but it cannot be ignored that in the digital age, retweeting of defamatory content has the potential to magnify defamatory allegations and it has significant ramifications on a person’s reputation.The Court also said that when a person with significant following on X (formerly Twitter) retweets a post, masses would consider it as endorsement or acknowledgment of what is said in the original tweet.Thus, Retweeting of defamatory content must invite penal, civil as well as tort action if the person retweeting the same does not attach a disclaimer. The Bench returned these findings while rejecting Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea seeking quashing of a defamation case filed against him by one Vikas Sankrityayan alias Vikas Pandey who claims to be a supporter of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and is founder of social media page ‘I Support Narendra Modi’..Here are eight significant observations/conclusions of the court:.Words ‘publishes’ or ‘publication’ as contained in Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (Criminal Defamation) will include the act of retweeting of defamatory imputation;Retweeting of defamatory content must invite penal, civil as well as tort action if there is no disclaimer;While all acts of retweeting may amount to publication of defamatory imputation, the extent of harm caused to the reputation of the aggrieved person would depend on the level of influence and the potential reach of the individual who retweets such defamatory imputation;It is ultimately for the person aggrieved to decide as to which retweet caused more harm to his reputation, and lowered his moral or intellectual character or his credibility among the members of society;The original author of the alleged defamatory content will also be liable for any action if a complaint is filed against him. However, it is the choice of the complainant, who may decide as to whether the person who retweeted such content had caused him more damage or not, since he had more friends or followers, by sharing a content; When a political person of some standing or a public figure or a social influencer posts some content on his/her social media account, it can be reasonably believed at the initial stage of a case where summoning is in question, that he did understand the repercussions and implications of posting such content and the corresponding harm it can cause to the person aggrieved;Large social media following of a Chief Minister of a State implies a wider reach, making any retweet a form of public endorsement or acknowledgment;If the act of retweeting or reposting is allowed to be misused, it will encourage people to repost defamatory content. A sense of responsibility has to be attached the act of retweeting..Kerjriwal was sued for defamation for re-tweeting a video titled ‘BJP IT Cell Part 2’ made by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee. .The Court upheld the trial court order summoning him in the case and concluded that there was no infirmity in the order. .Senior Advocate Manish Vashishth along with advocates Karan Sharma, Rishabh Sharma, Vedanth Vashishth, Mohd Irshad and Harshita Nathrani appeared for Arvind Kejriwal.Vikas Pandey was represented by advocates Raghav Awasthi, Kunal Tiwari and Mukesh Sharma.Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]