According to the complaint, Karnail Singh falsely claimed that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had recovered 37 kilograms of gold from Jain’s house and that he owned 1,100 acres of land.
NEW DELHI: On Saturday, Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court ruled on the questions of jurisdiction and maintainability in the defamation case filed by former Delhi Minister Satyender Jain. The Court said it has the authority to move forward with Jain’s complaint against then-BJP leader Karnail Singh.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Paras Dalal orally announced the order, stating, “This court has jurisdiction to proceed with the matter.”
The case has now been listed for arguments on cognisance on May 8. The court informed that the full, detailed order would be uploaded on the official website by evening.
In the meantime, the Court directed the lawyer representing Satyender Jain to submit amended memos of the parties involved. This comes after Karnail Singh’s side raised objections regarding the Court’s jurisdiction and whether the complaint is maintainable.
Advocate Vinod Dahiya, who represents Karnail Singh, argued that when the complaint was filed, Karnail Singh was not an elected MLA. Therefore, Dahiya claimed, the Special Court meant for MPs and MLAs cannot hear the matter.
On April 17, the Court had reserved its order after hearing arguments on whether the complaint could be maintained. Previously, on March 3, Karnail Singh’s lawyer had raised these issues before the Special MP/MLA Court.
Advocate Vinod Dahiya stressed that since Karnail Singh was neither an MP nor an MLA at the time of the alleged defamatory statements, the Special Court has no power to hear the complaint.
However, ACJM Paras Dalal made it clear that the Court considered the objections and was satisfied that it has the jurisdiction. He stated that the Court was convinced that it could hear the complaint. He further said that the accused still retains the right to argue his case later.
On the other hand, Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, representing Satyender Jain, argued that there are judgments from the Delhi High Court and the Manipur High Court that support Jain’s position.
Earlier, on February 6, the Court had questioned Jain’s lawyer, asking, “How is this complaint maintainable here? This court is to hear cases against the MP/MLAS.”
In response, Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, appearing through video conferencing, submitted that, as per a Delhi High Court judgment, a former MLA who is a complainant can file a case before the Special MP/MLA Court. He stated that if the complainant is a former MLA, he has the right to approach this Special Court.
The case stems from allegations made by Karnail Singh during an interview on a news channel on January 19, 2025. Satyender Jain filed the complaint stating that Karnail Singh, who contested the Delhi elections from Shakoor Basti on a BJP ticket, made several defamatory remarks against him.
According to the complaint, Karnail Singh falsely claimed that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had recovered 37 kilograms of gold from Jain’s house and that he owned 1,100 acres of land.
The complaint, filed through Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, mentions that Singh also accused Jain of amassing wealth through corrupt means, implying that public money was used for personal gain.
It is further alleged that Karnail Singh made false statements, claiming that large quantities of gold were seized from Jain’s home. Singh allegedly said, “He is Bhoo Mafia; he will go to jail again.”
Jain’s complaint also states that Singh defamed him by calling him corrupt and fraudulent, along with making several other false, malicious, and defamatory accusations.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
