Delhi Lt Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena received relief in a defamation case filed by activist Medha Patkar. The case dates back 24 years to when Saxena was active in Gujarat, before taking charge in Delhi. In 2003, the Supreme Court transferred the case to Saket Court in Delhi. The legal battle has been ongoing since then.
In a significant relief for Lieutenant Governor V.K. Saxena, a Delhi court dismissed social worker Medha Patkar’s request to examine an additional witness in her defamation case against him, describing her application as “a deliberate attempt to delay the trial.”
The ongoing litigation dates back to when LG Saxena was active in Gujarat and had not yet taken charge in Delhi’s Raj Niwas. The case was transferred to Delhi’s Saket Court in 2003 on the directives of the Supreme Court.
Mr. Saxena was leading an Ahmedabad-based NGO, the ‘Council for Civil Liberties,’ in 2000 when Ms. Patkar filed a defamation suit against him for publishing advertisements that criticized her and the Narmada Bachao Andolan.
Subsequently, Mr. Saxena also filed a defamation case against Ms. Patkar, stemming from a press release dated November 25, 2000, titled “True face of patriot.” Last year, she was sentenced to five months of simple imprisonment, a sentence that was later suspended, allowing her to be granted bail.
Dismissing Ms. Patkar’s plea on Tuesday, Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma of Saket Court criticized the social worker, stating,
“The fact that this witness has emerged only now, after all the complainant’s (Ms. Patkar’s) witnesses have been examined, raises serious doubts about the genuineness of this request.”
The court noted,
“This case has been pending for 24 years, and the complainant has already examined all the witnesses initially listed at the time of filing the complaint. Importantly, she had previously submitted an application… yet she did not include this new witness in that application.”
Also Read: “Plea Not Maintainable”: Delhi LG Files Reply To Medha Patkar’s Appeal Against Sentence
Furthermore, the court remarked,
“The complete absence of any reference to this witness throughout the 24-year trial suggests that this is an afterthought, likely introduced to artificially strengthen the complainant’s case.”
The court added,
“She has failed to explain how this new witness was recently discovered, and this lack of explanation further undermines the credibility of her request,”
Although the application was filed under an incorrect legal provision, the court chose to evaluate it entirely on its merits.
Magistrate Sharma asserted,
“Allowing such applications without proper justification would set a dangerous precedent. If parties are allowed to introduce new witnesses arbitrarily at such a late stage, trials could become endless, as litigants might continuously present new witnesses whenever it suits them, thereby prolonging proceedings indefinitely. The judicial process cannot be held hostage to such tactics, especially in a case that has already been pending for over two decades.”
Also Read: BREAKING| Medha Patkar Convicted by Delhi Court in Defamation Case Filed by VK Saxena
It is important to note that LG Saxena’s counsel has pointed out to the court that from June 20, 2005, to February 1, 2023, the trial has been delayed over 94 times due to the absence of complainant Ms. Patkar or her requests for adjournments.
The counsel indicated that after the summons was issued in 2005, Ms. Patkar did not appear and sought more than 46 adjournments for recording her evidence. She effectively ignored the legal process and only appeared before the trial court for the first time in 2012, seven years after the summons was issued.
The petition highlighted that after 20 adjournments, Ms. Patkar finally appeared and completed her examination in chief. However, she then remained absent for an extended period during her cross-examination, requesting 24 additional adjournments.