New Delhi:
A Delhi court on Thursday dismissed a criminal defamation complaint filed against former Chief Minister Atisi and AAP MP Sanjay Singh by Congress leader Sandeep Dekit, underlining his “legitimate practice of fundamental right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression and freedom of expression.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Paras Dalal refused to take cognizance of Mr. Dixit’s complaint and said that the average labeled by him and the material labeled by him was “not” political aspirations and claims “.
The order said that the statements of AAP politicians urged the public to take “intelligent decision of their precious votes” and cannot be called “qualified” copy of investigation under defamation laws.
“This court fails to find out that the essential elements of criminal defamation have not been facial. The press conference made by the respondents and the average is nothing more than the political discourse between rival and competitive parties,” said this.
The judge said that the statements have been “cast the statements but the political aspirations” and “claim on the complainant” and his party Indian National Congress (INC) has seen the prestige of Mr. Dixit without mental element.
The judge said, “Since no prima facie crime has been committed by ‘complaint of facts’, the court refuses to take cognizance of the offense,” said the judge.
The court said- “The BJP is helping the Congress in the Delhi elections”-neither for the purpose of Mr. Dixit, nor was it defamation.
The court said, “AAP said in elections that BJP and Ink are working in connivance with the aim of defeating AAP, it will not be defamation, but will be very well covered within ‘the fundamental freedom of speech and expression’.”
Mr. Dixit, the court held, could not be maligned for the reference given to Ink.
On Mr. Dixit’s allegations that the AAP leaders claimed that they had accepted the “crore rupees” from the BJP, the judge said that some bits and average were cut into pieces, or the answers to reporters’ questions could be seen in isolation.
The judge said, “The defendant number 1 (Ms. Atishi) can be clearly said that Inc. was getting money for his candidates’ campaign and Mr. Dixit was one of them.”
The respondents also asked Ink to clear the funding of their candidates, including Mr. Dixit.
“These (alleged defamation statements) seem to be a simple line of questions in the election period by opposing groups and it is also a valid practice of fundamental right to speaking and freedom of expression. Promoting political aspirations and emphasizing the functions of opposing candidates cannot always be called copy,” it is said.
Although some statements are anorexia at a political candidate, the court said, the media and the public were obtained and replied, but were being provoked in the court.
The court said that in a triangular competition, each candidate fought a personal battle, but given the nature of elections in the country, it was not uncommon for him to accuse the other two rival candidates.
It was said that politics was not foreign for such speeches of political aspirations and claims on rival candidates.
“One candidate cannot be called to discredit the other, when they are presenting some scenario of victory for the opposite candidate. During the election, a candidate may allege that once the candidate winns the contrary, they burn and join a rival faction. Such claims are corrected and even to join the party to join independent candidates.
The verdict highlighted the Indian elections, where voters had a real voice.
According to the complainant, at a press conference, Ms. Atisi and Mr. Singh alleged that Mr. Dixit not only took crores of rupees from the BJP, but the Congress had also hit the ruling party to defeat AAP. “
(Except for the headline, the story has not been edited by NDTV employees and is published by a syndicated feed.)
