The High Court of Madhya Pradesh has refused to quash an order of the Gwalior MP/MLA Court that took cognisance of a defamation complaint filed against former Chief Minister Digvijay Singh for his alleged remark that members of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh were ‘jasoos’ (detectives) of Pakistan.
A private complaint was filed by one Awdhesh Singh under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior, contending that on August 31, 2019, petitioner and Digvijay Singh had falsely blamed the workers of RSS and BJP for being the detectives of Pakistan.
The Congress leader had further said that the majority of persons who were arrested for allegedly working for ISI were non-Muslims, noted the plea. Complainant Awdhesh claimed that he was an Advocate by profession and a worker of RSS and also an inviting member of BJP.
He alleged that Digvijay’s statement was defamatory and caused a significant dent to the image of both RSS and BJP, of which he was a member.
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior had registered the complaint on June 20, 2022. On November 22, 2022, Special Judge, MP/MLA Court, Gwalior took cognisance of the complaint.
Petitioner Digvijay then moved the High Court on the grounds that the June 20, 2022 order of the JMFC to register the defamation complaint was passed without any application of mind as the complaint was not maintainable at the behest of the respondent being an Advocate by profession.
Digvijay submitted that since the alleged statement was made against BJP/RSS, the complaint should have been filed by the organisation or by the President and Secretary of the said organisation and that an individual cannot come forward to represent those organisations as he was not an aggrieved person.
The Senior Counsel representing the Congress leader further argued that no enquiry had been conducted by the Magistrate as per the requirement of Section 202 of CrPC before registering the complaint against Singh, who was residing out of the territorial jurisdiction of the Court concerned.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi at the High Court noted that since the case of the respondent/complainant was that Digvijay’s statement was not only against an organisation but also against a community not belonging to Muslims (including Hindus) and since the complainant was a Hindu and related to the RSS and BJP and his image and feelings, directly or indirectly got damaged, therefore, the Court observed that he could be considered as an aggrieved person.
Over the argument of the petitioner that the mandatory requirement of conducting an enquiry was not followed, the High Court noted that recording the statement of the complainant was also a sort of an enquiry done under Section 202 of CrPC.
Justice Dwivedi said that in this case, the statement of not only the complainant, but other witnesses have also been recorded. Since the Court registered the offence and issued summons to the petitioner after recording the statements, there was nothing wrong and no illegality was committed by the lower court, he added.
Dismissing Digvijay’s appeal, the Single-Judge Bench said that the lower court not only assigned reasons, but also applied its mind regarding the ingredients of Section 499 of IPC.
Senior Advocate Ajay Gupta, assisted by Advocate Rajeev Mishra, represented the petitioner, while Advocate Amit Dubey appeared for the respondent.
(Case title: Digvijay Singh vs Awdhesh Singh)