The Supreme Court of India offered a blunt reminder about the nature of politics during a recent hearing of Union Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting L Murugan’s defamation case. “You cannot be touchy in politics,” the apex court observed, addressing the sensitivities often provoked in political arenas.
The case revolves around a criminal defamation proceeding against Minister Murugan, initiated by the Chennai-based Murasoli Trust over statements he allegedly made during a December 2020 press conference. The Madras High Court had previously declined to quash the proceedings on September 5, 2023, prompting Murugan to seek relief from the Supreme Court.
In its interim order last year on September 27, the Supreme Court stayed the lower court’s proceedings and scheduled a hearing while also asking for a response from the Trust. As the case resumed, the counsel for Murugan challenged the basis of the defamation claim, questioning, “Where is the question of defamation in this case?”*
Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan, presiding over the matter, decided to adjourn the case following a request from the Trust’s lawyer, setting the next session for four weeks later.
The High Court’s earlier stance was that it could not delve into the merits or disputed facts at the quash petition stage, focusing instead on whether the complaint prima facie constituted an offense. According to the High Court, the alleged defamatory statements should be “tested only from the point of view of a common prudent man.”
While Murugan’s petition was dismissed by the High Court, which directed a swift resolution within three months, it left room for him to raise all pertinent defenses during the trial, to be evaluated on their own merits and in accordance with the law.
