Will the SC Hear Kejriwal and Atishi's Defamation Plea Today?

Share:
Audio Loading voice…
Will the SC Hear Kejriwal and Atishi's Defamation Plea Today?

Synopsis

The Supreme Court is preparing to hear a significant plea from Arvind Kejriwal and Atishi, challenging a defamation case that arose from their comments about voter list manipulations. This case raises critical questions regarding political discourse and the responsibilities of parties in electoral integrity.

Key Takeaways

Supreme Court to hear Kejriwal and Atishi's plea.
Case involves allegations against BJP regarding voter list manipulations.
Previous ruling emphasized a higher standard for political discourse.
Potential implications for future political accountability in India.
Defamation suit filed by BJP leader Rajiv Babbar.

New Delhi, Jan 27 (NationPress) The Supreme Court is set to deliberate on Tuesday regarding a petition submitted by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal and former Delhi Chief Minister Atishi. They are seeking to annul the summons issued against them in a defamation suit concerning their comments about the supposed removal of voters’ names from electoral lists.

According to the causelist available on the apex Court's website, this case is scheduled to be heard by a Bench consisting of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N.K. Singh.

Previously, in a significant relief for Kejriwal and Atishi, the top court had halted further proceedings in the defamation case initiated by BJP leader Rajiv Babbar, stating that political discussions must be held to a “higher threshold”.

In an interim ruling, a former Bench led by Justice Hrishikesh Roy (now retired) emphasized that the issue of whether a political party can be regarded as an aggrieved party for filing a defamation suit demands thorough scrutiny.

The Supreme Court had remarked, “Issue Notice returnable in four weeks. In the meantime, further proceedings shall remain stayed.”

In September 2024, the Delhi High Court declined to intervene with the trial court's order summoning the AAP leaders for alleged offences under Sections 499/500 of the now-repealed Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Rejecting the petition, it stated: “The defence advanced by the petitioners that the statements were made bona fide and for the public good must be substantiated during the trial.”

The Bench, led by Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, noted that “the statements in this case appear prima facie defamatory, intending to malign the BJP and gain undue political advantage by alleging that the BJP was responsible for the removal of names of approximately 30 lakh voters from specific communities.”

Justice Mendiratta further indicated that “political parties have minimal involvement in the addition or removal of names on the voters' list, as this task is designated to the Election Commission in compliance with the law.”

In March 2019, the trial court had summoned Kejriwal, Atishi, and others following a complaint from Babbar, who represented the BJP’s Delhi unit. Babbar’s complaint alleged that the AAP leaders held a press conference claiming that, under BJP's directives, the names of 30 lakh voters from Baniya, Purvanchali, and Muslim communities had been eliminated by the Election Commission. Following the Delhi High Court's refusal to intervene with the trial court's summons, Kejriwal and Atishi approached the Supreme Court seeking to dismiss the entire proceedings.

Point of View

The ongoing legal confrontations involving prominent political figures like Kejriwal and Atishi underscore the intricate balance between political accountability and freedom of speech. The Supreme Court's decision may set a precedent for future political discourse in India, emphasizing the need for responsible communication among political leaders.
NationPress
20 Jun 2026

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the defamation case against Kejriwal and Atishi about?
The defamation case stems from their comments alleging the deletion of voters' names from electoral rolls, linked to BJP's actions.
What did the Supreme Court previously rule regarding this case?
The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings in the defamation case, highlighting the need for a higher threshold in political discourse.
When is the Supreme Court hearing scheduled?
The hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, as per the causelist published on the apex Court's website.
Who filed the defamation suit against them?
The suit was filed by BJP leader Rajiv Babbar.
What are the implications of this case?
This case could impact how political discourse is conducted and the accountability of political leaders in India.
Nation Press
The Trail

Connected Dots

Tracing the thread behind this story — newest first.

8 Dots
  1. Latest 1 month ago
  2. 2 months ago
  3. 2 months ago
  4. 3 months ago
  5. 3 months ago
  6. 1 year ago
  7. 1 year ago
  8. 1 year ago
Google Prefer NP
On Google