The Supreme Court on Wednesday continued its previous order, exempting Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan from personal appearance in a criminal defamation case filed against him by Congress MP Vivek Tankha. The case will now be heard on March 26, as Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal deferred the plea concerning Chouhan and two other BJP leaders.
Tankha, who is also a senior advocate, has accused Chouhan, BJP state president V D Sharma, and former minister Bhupendra Singh of conducting a “coordinated, malicious, false and defamatory” campaign against him. The allegations stem from claims that Tankha opposed OBC reservation during the 2021 Panchayat elections in Madhya Pradesh, which he contends were made to gain political advantage.
The defamation suit originated after the Madhya Pradesh High Court on October 25 refused to quash the case against Chouhan and his associates. Represented by senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, Chouhan argued that the statements in question were made during legislative proceedings and thus protected under Article 194(2) of the Constitution. This provision shields members from being liable in court for any statements made or votes cast in the legislature.
Jethmalani highlighted the unusual nature of issuing bailable warrants in a summons case where appearance could be managed through legal counsel, questioning the necessity of the leaders’ physical presence in court.
On the opposing side, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, representing Tankha, argued that the BJP leaders should have presented themselves before the trial court, questioning the court’s recourse if they failed to appear.
Tankha’s complaint not only targets the alleged defamatory statements made in the lead-up to the Panchayat elections but also seeks Rs 10 crore in damages. He asserts that the statements significantly harmed his reputation by falsely accusing him of opposing OBC reservations in the Supreme Court, following a December 17, 2021, apex court order that halted the Panchayat elections in the state over reservation issues.
The case has seen the BJP leaders defending their actions in the high court, arguing that newspaper clippings provided by Tankha do not substantiate a defamation claim. They contend that the presented material fails to demonstrate any insinuation or defamation as alleged by Tankha.
