Supreme Court stays proceedings in defamation case filed by Manish Sisodia against Manoj Tiwari

The Supreme Court today stayed the trial court proceedings in the defamation case filed by Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia against BJP leader Manoj Tiwari [Manoj Kumar Tiwari v. Manish Sisodia & Ors]..The Bench of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde and Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian also issued notice in Tiwari's petition against the Delhi High Court's dismissal of his plea challenging the trial court order summoning him in the criminal defamation case..The stay was granted after Senior Advocate R Venkataramani, representing Tiwari said that Sisodia could not have filed a defamation petition without going through the rigors of Section 199(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. .Section 199(2) provides that when defamation is against the President, Vice-President, Governor, a Minister or any other public servant with respect to discharge of his/ her official functions, then a Sessions Court may take cognizance of such offence, without the case being committed to it, upon a complaint in writing made by the Public Prosecutor.."A minister or any authority mentioned under Section 199(2) are given a protection by that provision. This is a protection so that ministers are not defamed. All the mandatory stages contemplated by the provision cannot be skipped," Venkataramani said. He submitted that the alleged defamatory statement made by Tiwari was in relation to Sisodia's conduct as a minister thereby attracting Section 199(2). ."We will consider it. Interim stay (on proceedings)," the Court said. .Back in 2019, Harish Khurana had filed a Right to Information (RTI) query seeking details of the Delhi government’s expenditure on classrooms in government schools. Citing the information received in the RTI reply, Tiwari held a press conference wherein he called into question the expenditure incurred out of funds of the public exchequer. He had also posted a tweet asking the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government to clarify the same..Sisodia subsequently filed a criminal defamation case against Tiwari for alleging that he indulged in corrupt practices in relation to the construction of Delhi government school classrooms. On the basis of this complaint, summons was issued by a Special MP/MLA Court to Tiwari, Gupta and others..The BJP leader then moved the Delhi High Court challenging the order summoning him in the criminal defamation case..Tiwari had argued before the High Court that the entire case was based on legally inadmissible evidence such as newspaper reports. It was also said that the evidence in the form of CD etc was filed without the requisite compliance of the parameters of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.Sisodia, on the other hand, submitted that this was not the stage to test the admissibility of evidence..By an order pronounced on December 17, 2020, the Delhi High Court had dismissed Tiwari's plea..In his petition filed before the apex court, Tiwari has stated that the Magistrate had taken cognizance of Sisodia’s complaint without jurisdiction, despite the fact that the allegations against Tiwari did not constitute the ingredients of the offence under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalises defamation..The plea raises substantial questions of law concerning the interpretation of Section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which deals with the procedure for prosecution for defamation. Section 199(2) specifically deals with allegations of defamation made against, among others, a public servant employed in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. As per the provision, in such a case, a Court of Session may take cognizance of such offence, without the case being committed to it, upon a complaint in writing made by the Public Prosecutor..Tiwari’s petition states that in view of the divergence of opinions expressed by various High Courts on the provision, the issue needs to be resolved by the Supreme Court..Further, it raises the question as to whether the statements made by an elected representative in his capacity as watchdog of the affairs of the government can be brought within the scope of Section 499 IPC, when the statements are not per se defamatory..Tiwari also claims that he did not make any imputation against Sisodia in a personal capacity, and had only asked him to come forward and explain the expenditure to the citizens of Delhi..[Read Order]