Did the Supreme Court Reject Kangana Ranaut's Plea Against Defamation Summons?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Supreme Court's recent dismissal of Kangana Ranaut's plea against a defamation case summons raises significant questions about free speech and the responsibilities of public figures. This case underscores the intricate balance between personal expression and the potential consequences of public discourse.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court dismissed Kangana Ranaut’s plea against a defamation summons.
- The case involves complex issues of free speech and public accountability.
- Mahinder Kaur alleges defamation due to misidentification.
- Kangana’s social media activity has serious legal implications.
- Public figures must navigate their expressive freedoms carefully.
New Delhi, Sep 12 (NationPress) The Supreme Court on Friday decided not to entertain a petition brought forth by actress-turned-politician Kangana Ranaut, which challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision to uphold a summoning order from a Bathinda court in a defamation case.
The defamation allegation was made by 73-year-old Mahinder Kaur from Bahadurgarh Jandian village in Bathinda district. Kaur accused Kangana of defaming her in a post on the social media platform X, where she mistakenly identified Kaur as a Shaheen Bagh protester, Bilkis Bano, and insinuated that women like her could be paid Rs 100 to protest.
"This was not a mere retweet. The interpretation of the tweet is not something that can be addressed in a quashing petition. Clarifications should be made in the trial court, not in this petition," noted a Bench led by Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta.
"We cannot comment on your tweet. It might affect your trial. Are you looking to withdraw your petition?" asked Justice Nath during the proceedings.
Recognizing the Supreme Court's reluctance to hear her plea, Kangana's legal representative opted to withdraw the special leave petition (SLP).
In February 2022, a Bathinda judicial magistrate had issued a summons directing Kangana Ranaut to appear in court.
Frustrated by the summoning order, she approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, arguing that the trial court misinterpreted Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
After a detailed hearing, Justice Tribhuvan Singh Dahiya of the Punjab and Haryana High Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, leading Kangana to appeal to the Supreme Court.
In her retweet, Kangana had expressed: "Ha ha ha, she is the same dadi who appeared in Time magazine for being the most powerful Indian... And she is available for 100 rupees. Pakistani journalists have hijacked international PR for India in an embarrassing way. We need our own people to represent us internationally."
The controversial post, which was later deleted, targeted Mahinder Kaur during the farmers' protest at Delhi's borders. This stemmed from a tweet by Gautam Yadav, which included a photo of Kaur, who argued that the defamatory comments damaged her dignity and reputation among fellow protesters.
Kaur claimed she had no links to the Shaheen Bagh protests or the woman highlighted in Time magazine, asserting that the allegations were completely false.
Belonging to a farming family and actively involved in the farmers' agitation, Kaur maintained that Kangana Ranaut's remarks subjected her to public mockery and caused her mental distress.
Point of View
It is vital to approach this case with an unbiased lens, recognizing the implications for both free speech and the dignity of individuals. The court's decision reflects the complexities of legal interpretations surrounding public discourse, and it is essential to uphold the principles of justice while considering the societal impact of such cases.
NationPress
13/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the reason behind Kangana Ranaut's plea?
Kangana Ranaut challenged a summoning order in a defamation case filed against her, claiming the court had misapplied legal provisions.
Who filed the defamation complaint against Kangana Ranaut?
The complaint was filed by 73-year-old Mahinder Kaur from Bahadurgarh Jandian village in Bathinda district.
What was the content of Kangana's controversial post?
In her post, Kangana mistakenly identified Mahinder Kaur as a Shaheen Bagh protester and suggested women like her could be paid to protest.
What was the Supreme Court's response to the plea?
The Supreme Court declined to entertain the plea, indicating that interpretations regarding the tweet should be made in the trial court.
What impact did Kangana's remarks have on Mahinder Kaur?
Kaur claimed the remarks harmed her reputation and subjected her to public ridicule during her participation in the farmers' agitation.
