Delhi Court adjourns defamation case hearing against Ashok Gehlot
New Delhi/IBNS/UNI: A Delhi Court Friday adjourned the hearing in a defamation complaint case filed against former Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot to Dec 22.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Harjeet Singh Jaspal after the hearing said, "This court receives the order dated December 13 passed by Ld. Sessions Court, RADC, Delhi, whereby the order on summoning has been upheld."
The court said, "Arguments on framing of notice have already been heard from the side of the complainant. Be put up for arguments from the defence side on the date fixed i.e. 22.12.2023 at 02:30 pm."
Counsel for Shekhawat sought oral exemption for the complainant Shekhawat and Counsel for Gehlot moved exemption Application by submitting the identity of the accused is not disputed by the defence.
In this matter, Union Jal Shakti Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat had filed a defamation complaint case before the Delhi court against Gehlot on the allegations that Gehlot had defamed him and falsely accused him of being involved in the Rs 900 crore Sanjivani Credit Society scam.
He contended that his name did not appear anywhere when the Rajasthan government investigated the matter.
It is alleged by Shekhawat that the accused, by way of press conferences, media reports/social media posts, etc. has publicly stated that not only the complainant and his family
members are accused in the Sanjeevani scam, but also that the allegations against the complainant, in the said scam, stand proven.
His counsel had alleged that the accused on different occasions addressed the media and also uploaded videos and posts on his social media accounts to maliciously defame the complainant by way of false statements.
Shekhawat requested to court Gehlot be prosecuted for criminal defamation defined under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sought appropriate financial compensation for the loss of his reputation.
Counsel for Union Jal Shakti Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat opposed the application and submitted that the said application is merely an abuse of process of law and is nothing more than delaying tactics.