The Supreme Court dismissed a plea by AIADMK’s M Babu Murugavel, challenging the Madras High Court’s quashing of a defamation complaint against Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker M Appavu. The ruling emphasized that political statements relating to party loyalty require clear personal harm for defamation claims, highlighting the judiciary’s cautious stance on such cases.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a plea by AIADMK advocates wing joint secretary M Babu Murugavel, challenging the quashing of a defamation complaint against Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker M Appavu. The bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S V N Bhatti refused to intervene in the October 25, 2023 order of the Madras High Court, which had set aside the complaint.
“We have an anti-defection law which shows that our democracy and legislature recognize such a phenomenon in the political system. You are saying as if something strange has happened. We have an anti-defection law precisely to deal with such things,”
the bench remarked, dismissing the plea.
Murugavel’s complaint stemmed from a statement made by Appavu during a book release function in November 2023. Appavu had claimed that 40 AIADMK MLAs were ready to switch to the DMK after the passing of AIADMK leader J Jayalalithaa in December 2016.
Murugavel alleged that Appavu’s statement defamed the AIADMK, tarnishing the party’s reputation. The complaint invoked Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC, which deal with defamation. However, the Madras High Court quashed the complaint, reasoning that the alleged statement did not specifically or remotely affect Murugavel as an individual.
“If he claims that he carries the sword for his newly embraced party, he must have expressed authorization to represent his party. Whereas, the complaint is in his capacity and not in the representative capacity,”
the High Court had observed.
Read Also: “Fix Accountability on Officers Responsible for Delays” – Supreme Court to All States on Legal Appeals
During the hearing, Senior Advocate S Nagamuthu, appearing for Murugavel, argued that the alleged statement had a direct impact on the AIADMK’s reputation. However, the Supreme Court bench remained unconvinced. Following the court’s observations, the counsel withdrew the plea, and the matter was dismissed as withdrawn.
The dismissal highlights the judiciary’s cautious approach to defamation cases involving political statements. By referencing the anti-defection law, the Supreme Court emphasized the political system’s recognition of shifting loyalties, especially in a democracy.
The ruling underscores that defamation complaints must clearly establish personal harm or authorized representation to withstand judicial scrutiny, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
