Click the Play button to listen to article

The Delhi High Court on Thursday (September 10) orally said that posts made by Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka about BJP leader and senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia without verification was not correct, and suggested them to take down the same on their own. 

The court was hearing Bhatia's defamation suit against CJP's Abhijit Dipke, Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka. Bhatia is aggrieved by a post on X Corp (formerly Twitter) published by Das and Ranka on September 05 in the aftermath of arrest of Swatantra Bhardwaj, who is accused of assaulting a teenage CJP protester.

As per the suit, the post in question is an AI generated tweet wherein it has been falsely attributed to him that he described Bhardwaj as “dimagi naxali” and “jaatiwaadi.”

At the outset Justice Tushar Rao Gedela orally noted that that there was nothing alleged against Dipke and the counsel for Dipke, Advocate Nakul Gandhi, requested that he be deleted from the array of parties. 

The court meanwhile orally said, "There are different ways of protesting. You are all youngsters. You may have anxieties. But attacking like this without verifying is not correct right. If you are willing to take down on your own, put your replies. We don't want to pass takedown order".

Meanwhile counsel appearing for Saurav Das said that the tweet was already deleted. 

To which the court orally said, "But you put something else also. You have right to express but sometimes expressions need to be put in more articulate manner. So that intention goes in right way. We understand because we have gone through that age". 

The court further orally said to Bhatia that there were other ways of handling the issue wherein he could have, instead of coming to the court, spoken to the defendants. 

However Bhatia said, "This is case of aggravated defamation. These posts cant be on internet because they have millions of followers. It is causing damage to image of plaintiff. The plaintiff gave them a chance". 

The court said that it will ask the counsel for the defendants to take instructions and inform if the defendants are willing to take down the posts on their own.

"Defendant 1 (Das) and 2 (Ranka) are the ones who have done it," the court said. 

Bhatia meanwhile said that he was a law abiding citizen, while the other side is a person "who forges picture and puts logo of a news agency to give it credibility". 

At this stage the court orally asked as to how Dipke and CJP were made parties and asked what had they done. Counsel for Dipke submitted that there was not a single tweet by Dipke and the prayer in the suit was only with respect to Das and Ranka. 

Bhatia however said, "Your lordships may come to tweets...There is an ecosystem which targets a person who is complaining that a false picture has been put. He is saying that you should take criticism". 

To this the court orally said that it had advised the defendants and has asked them to take down on their own.

Passing over the matter, the court thereafter said to Das and Ranka's counsel, "Take instructions and come back. You are youngsters you have long way to go. Why do you want to spend time in courts?" 

Bhatia is aggrieved by a post on X Corp (formerly Twitter) published by Das and Ranka on September 05 in the aftermath of arrest of Swatantra Bhardwaj, who is accused of assaulting a teenage CJP protester.

As per the suit, the post in question is an AI generated tweet wherein it has been falsely attributed to him that he described Bhardwaj as “dimagi naxali” and “jaatiwaadi.”

He has contended that both Das and Ranka did not merely engage in criticism, comment or disagreement with any statement actually made by him but have allegedly falsely represented to the public that he made statements which, in fact, he had never made.

The impugned material was accompanied and/or associated with the photograph of the Plaintiff followed by a false/fake statement, thereby creating an unmistakable and false nexus between the Plaintiff and the words/content disseminated by the said Defendants,” the suit contends.

Further, the Rs. 2 crore defamation suit alleges that the CJP and its leaders have been consistently engaged in the practice of making public comments and publications that are calculated to lower the dignity, authority and institutional standing of the judiciary.

Regarding Das, Bhatia has specifically argued that he “recently shot to fame” by attacking Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma for not recusing herself from hearing CBI's challenge to the order discharging AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal and others in the liquor policy case.

He has also referred to Das' tweet about incarceration of Umar Khalid, accused in 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. According to Bhatia, the post goes far beyond fair comment on any specific judicial order or proceeding.

“The Defendant No. 1 (Das), while holding himself out as Chief Spokesperson/Co-convenor of an unregistered collective, has chosen to publicly celebrate and endorse an individual facing serious criminal allegations by declaring the judicial process itself to be permanently stained, thereby demonstrating a propensity to use social-media platforms for institutional denigration,” the suit states.

Further, Bhatia has said that the Defendants, operating under the “banner of an unregistered association that publicly claims to have "no political links" and to be fighting a cause "bigger than any party," systematically utilise social-media platforms to comment upon, criticise and attack the judiciary in a manner that goes beyond fair comment on specific orders and enters the realm of broad institutional aspersion.

“Such conduct is further exemplified by recent publications in which comparisons and analogies of a highly pejorative nature have been drawn involving the judiciary, including content that seeks to equate or juxtapose judicial processes or outcomes with references that are calculated to provoke public outrage and diminish institutional respect,” it adds.

Title: Gaurav Bhatia v. Saurav Das & Ors

Tags: