Top
News Updates

Delhi High Court Dismisses BJP's Manoj Tiwari's Plea Against Summons in Defamation Case by AAP's Sisodia

Shreya Agarwal
17 Dec 2020 2:23 PM GMT
Delhi High Court Dismisses BJPs Manoj Tiwaris Plea Against Summons in Defamation Case by AAPs Sisodia
x

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court today dismissed a petition filed by BJP leader Manoj Tiwari challenging the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case by Delhi Deputy Chief Minister, Manish Sisodia.Challenge by BJP's Vijender Gupa was also dismissed by the court in an order pronounced by Justice Anu Malhotra.The defamation case relates to a complaint filed by Sisodia...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court today dismissed a petition filed by BJP leader Manoj Tiwari challenging the summons issued to him in a criminal defamation case by Delhi Deputy Chief Minister, Manish Sisodia.

Challenge by BJP's Vijender Gupa was also dismissed by the court in an order pronounced by Justice Anu Malhotra.
The defamation case relates to a complaint filed by Sisodia against BJP leaders — Members of Parliament Manoj Tiwari, Hans Raj Hans and Pravesh Verma, MLAs Manjinder Singh Sirsa, Vijender Gupta, and Spokesperson Harish Khurana — for allegedly making defamatory statements of his involvement in corruption of nearly Rs 2,000 crore in the building of classrooms in Delhi's government schools.
Challenging the summons issued by a Rouse Avenue court to Tiwari and other co-accused persons in November last year, Sr. Adv. Pinky Anand's main line of attack on the summons order was that the same was based on a CD which had been relied upon as evidence, even in the absence of a record. She argued that in the absence of a record, the CD was not legally admissible as evidence and that the certificate produced under Section 65B of the Evidence Act, was also "wholly unreliable".
Sisodia, on the other hand, submitted that this was not the stage to test the admissibility of evidence.
Sr. Adv. Vikas Pahwa appearing for Sisodia, on the other hand, had pressed that the Section 65B certificate produced in the matter did not suffer from any anomaly and was very well valid. He relied on a judgment by the High Court and argued that it was settled law that this Certificate could be submitted at any stage.
He also argued that the accused persons had not denied at any stage that the press conference had in fact taken place, and if there indeed was any corruption, the accused persons should have filed a criminal complaint.
Senior Advocate Pinky Anand appeared for Manoj Tiwari. Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa appeared for Sisodia. Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur appeared for VIjender Gupta.


Next Story
Share it