The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal defamation proceedings against senior advocate and former Member of Parliament Pinaki Misra New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal defamation proceedings against senior advocate and former Member of Parliament Pinaki Misra, in a case alleging that he had said certain objectionable words about a lawyer in an interview.The high court also quashed a trial court’s April 2019 order summoning Misra to face trial for defamation, saying permitting the proceedings to continue would not advance the cause of justice.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the complainant had examined himself as the sole witness and had not provided any material to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had lowered his reputation in others’ estimation.”There is no material on record, in the form of statement of any other person or otherwise, to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had the effect of lowering the reputation of Respondent No 2 (complainant) in the estimation of others.”The allegation that the publication caused damage to his reputation, by itself, remains an assertion of the complainant and does not establish the statutory requirement contemplated by Explanation 4 to Section 499 (defamation) of IPC,” the court said in its order passed on August 25.The high court said permitting the criminal proceedings to continue would not advance the cause of justice and instead subject the petitioner (Misra) to the rigours of a criminal trial in the absence of sufficient foundational material.”Accordingly, this court deems it appropriate, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, to quash the impugned summoning order and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The petition is accordingly allowed,” it said.It was alleged that the complainant advocate had filed a complaint with the Bar Council of Delhi in 2018 against Misra, alleging that the senior advocate’s appearance on behalf of power distribution companies before the National Green Tribunal amounted to professional misconduct.After the dispute was reported in a newspaper, it was alleged that Misra gave an interview to another newspaper in which he purportedly used certain objectionable words against the complainant.The complainant filed two defamation complaints alleging that Misra’s objectionable remarks have lowered his reputation in the eyes of the public and also affected his professional life.The high court, in its order, noted that the allegation against Misra was founded upon the contents of an online news report.Join conversationView All Comments →Share your thoughts in the commentsInsightfulAgreeDisagreeSkepticalConcerningPromisingWorth ReadingBig DevelopmentPost CommentBe respectful · TOI community guidelinesIt said Misra had specifically denied having given the interview and had communicated in March 2019 to the editor of the news establishment, denying that he gave the alleged interview and seeking the publication’s clarification.The court said the alleged imputation was founded upon an online news report, which has not been supported by examination of the concerned reporter, author, editor or any other person associated with the news portal, particularly when the petitioner had specifically denied having made the alleged statement and had also sent a communication seeking clarification in this regard.PTIGet the latest India News and Live updates. Download the TOI app.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosFake IAS Officer Tripti Rajput Under Probe, Police Recover CBI Cards And Government DocumentsWhy A Supreme Court Judge Wants The Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice Transferred?18 Rounds, Point-Blank: How Haryanvi Singer Ankit Balyan Was Gunned Down Outside Gym In UPIndia-China Talks Yield 8-Point Consensus; New Military Hotlines, Border Talks On The TableSkardu Base Was India’s Target During Operation Sindoor, Ex-CDS Reveals Why Strike Was Aborted’Gone In Seconds’: Kailash Mansarovar Pilgrims Missing, 77 Isha Foundation Members Among ThemSinger Mary Millben Hits Back Over ‘Anti-Modi’ Politics Over Mohan Bhagwat New York Event105 Indians Missing In Nepal Flash Floods; Tibet-Side Surge Leaves Eight Dead | Watch‘Big Reveal’ Or Big Scam? August 25 Insta Account Make Hype Sparks ₹8.5 Crore Scam Row’Hijab On Heads, Not Minds’: Owaisi Calls Allahabad High Court Ruling ‘Attack On Islam’123Photostories8 simple hacks to peel potatoes; the one that works the best and why5 Fluffy and furry dog breeds that can make your home even more adorable7 houseplants that may help keep mosquitoes away: From basil to mintCan infections such as mumps affect male fertility years later?Psychology says why the sibling you couldn’t stand as a child can become the person you trust most as an adultFrom working in Bhojpuri cinema, signing random films to pay his rent to earning Rs 1.5 lakh for one episode of Comedy Circus; When Krushna Abhishek opened up about his journeyLoro Piana to Zegna: Lesser-known luxury sneaker brands the old-money tribe knows by heart10 baby boy names with powerful meanings and fascinating ancient rootsIntuition or fear? 5 ways to tell what your gut is really telling youPrincess Diana’s ‘Last Ring’ from Dodi Al-Fayed: The mystery behind the ‘Dis-moi Oui’ ring123Hot PicksNepal floodUPTET Result 2026Sunny LeoneKerala name changeRRB NTPC UG CBT 2 examAnkit Baliyan murderSridhar VembuDelhi murderNEET PG 2026 admit cardTop TrendingAnkit Balyan MurderChandigarh MurderSamay RainaUdaipur HotelFlorida Car CrashUS Green Card HolderBengal HospitalTamil Nadu Son MurderElon MuskKanpur Aircraft Crash
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal defamation proceedings against senior advocate and former Member of Parliament Pinaki Misra, in a case alleging that he had said certain objectionable words about a lawyer in an interview.The high court also quashed a trial court’s April 2019 order summoning Misra to face trial for defamation, saying permitting the proceedings to continue would not advance the cause of justice.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the complainant had examined himself as the sole witness and had not provided any material to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had lowered his reputation in others’ estimation.“There is no material on record, in the form of statement of any other person or otherwise, to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had the effect of lowering the reputation of Respondent No 2 (complainant) in the estimation of others.“The allegation that the publication caused damage to his reputation, by itself, remains an assertion of the complainant and does not establish the statutory requirement contemplated by Explanation 4 to Section 499 (defamation) of IPC,” the court said in its order passed on August 25.The high court said permitting the criminal proceedings to continue would not advance the cause of justice and instead subject the petitioner (Misra) to the rigours of a criminal trial in the absence of sufficient foundational material.“Accordingly, this court deems it appropriate, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, to quash the impugned summoning order and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The petition is accordingly allowed,” it said.It was alleged that the complainant advocate had filed a complaint with the Bar Council of Delhi in 2018 against Misra, alleging that the senior advocate’s appearance on behalf of power distribution companies before the National Green Tribunal amounted to professional misconduct.After the dispute was reported in a newspaper, it was alleged that Misra gave an interview to another newspaper in which he purportedly used certain objectionable words against the complainant.The complainant filed two defamation complaints alleging that Misra’s objectionable remarks have lowered his reputation in the eyes of the public and also affected his professional life.The high court, in its order, noted that the allegation against Misra was founded upon the contents of an online news report.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
It said Misra had specifically denied having given the interview and had communicated in March 2019 to the editor of the news establishment, denying that he gave the alleged interview and seeking the publication’s clarification.The court said the alleged imputation was founded upon an online news report, which has not been supported by examination of the concerned reporter, author, editor or any other person associated with the news portal, particularly when the petitioner had specifically denied having made the alleged statement and had also sent a communication seeking clarification in this regard.PTI