Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Kangana Ranaut's Plea Seeking Quashing Of Defamation Case Over Tweet On Farmers' Protest

The Punjab & Haryana High Court today refused to quash a summoning order against actress and BJP MP Kangana Ranaut in a defamation case filed over remarks made on the 2021 farmers' protest.

Ranaut had posted on Twitter that an elderly woman protester, Mahinder Kaur, was paid to participate in the agitation.

Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya said, “The order has been passed after due application of mind to the facts of the case, by examining the preliminary evidence in the light of relevant provisions of law. And it is not the petitioner's case that the retweet is not by her.”

The Court further opined that non-receipt of report by Twitter Communications India Private Limited (TCIPL) as to whether the alleged retweet has been made by the petitioner, cannot be a ground to divest the Magistrate of jurisdiction under Section 202 Cr.P.C.

“The report could not be submitted as the company was neither the owner nor in control of www.twitter.com, and was a separate entity engaged only in research, development and marketing,” it added.

Justice Dahiya highlighted that In the present case, after inquiry the Magistrate was prima facie satisfied that the retweet was by the petitioner, and the facts alleged in the compliant would constitute the offence under Section 499 IPC. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the impugned order issuing process against her without a report by the TCIPL.

The Court rejected Kangana's argument that the retweet was in good faith and in the absence of mens rea she was entitled to the benefit of Ninth and Tenth Exception to Section 499 IPC; and that failure of the Magistrate to examine the issue rendered the impugned order unsustainable.

“A perusal of the Ninth Exception reproduced above shows it is meant to exclude from the offence of defamation an imputation which is made in good faith by a person for protection of his/her or someone else's interests, or for the public good,” the Court observed.

It pointed that the Tenth Exception excludes from defamation a caution which has been made in good faith and is intended for good of the person to whom it is conveyed or of some other person in whom that person might be interested, or for the public good. 

Rejecting the argument that the Magistrate was mandatorily required to consider whether these Exceptions were attracted in her case, the Court said said that, “as per the settled law, there is no explicit bar on the Magistrate precluding him from considering whether any of the Exceptions protect the person to be summoned; however, such non-consideration by itself would not render the order issuing process illegal.”

The Court also said that because the Complainant has filed a complaint only against the petitioner and not against the person to whom the original tweet has been attributed, in itself cannot be a ground to contend that the complaint is mala fide. 

“There is nothing on record, nor could any material be shown by learned counsel for the petitioner which prima facie indicates such an intention on the respondent's part in filing the complaint in question. There are specific allegations against the petitioner who is a celebrity, that false and defamatory imputations by her in the retweet have dented the respondent's reputation and lowered her in her own estimation, as also in the eyes of others. Therefore, filing of the complaint to vindicate her rights cannot be termed mala fide,” the Court observed.

In the light of the above the plea was dismissed.

Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate with Ms. Anmol Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Achintaya Soni, Advocate, Ms. Mehndi Singhal, Advocate, Mr. Dhruv Chowfla, Advocate, Mr. Nitesh Jhajhria, Advocate for the petitioner

Ms. G.K. Mann, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Dassaur, Advocate and Mr. Armaan Sandhu, Advocate for the respondent.

Title: Kangana Ranaut v. Mahinder Kaur

Click here to read/download the order