Delhi HC Hears Plea By AAP Leader Raghav Chadha, Satyendra Jain Challenging Summons in Defamation Case
Goswami had filed a defamation case against five AAP leaders, including Atishi Marlena and Satyendra Jain. He alleged that the leaders had made statements regarding the alleged misappropriation of around Rs 2,500 crore belonging to the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC), which was under the BJP’s control;
The Delhi High Court, on Tuesday, heard the petition filed by AAP MP Raghav Chadha as well as Satyendra Jain, challenging the summons issued in defamation case initiated by BJP leader Chhail Bihari Goswami.
The matter arose after allegations were made by Chadha and other AAP members on social media concerning financial irregularities in the municipal corporation, which Goswami, a former municipal corporator, claimed were defamatory.
The bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja presided over the matter and listed the case for August 7, 2025.
The counsel appearing for Chadha informed the court that the defamation complaint was based on certain tweets alleging misappropriation of funds by the municipal corporation. At the time, Chhail Bihari Goswami was serving as a municipal corporator. The trial court had earlier summoned Chadha and Satyendra Jain in connection with the complaint.
Upon questioning by the court regarding the previous proceedings, Chadha’s counsel informed that an application for discharge was filed before the trial court, but it was rejected. The matter was then taken to the revisional court, which also dismissed the plea on the ground that Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was the appropriate remedy. Subsequently, Chadha approached the Delhi High Court.
The advocate further informed the court that the matter was initially heard in part by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. However, due to a change in the roster, she was reassigned to civil cases, and the matter was released. The case was later listed before Justice Vikas Mahajan, but it could not be heard due to time constraints.
The counsel also raised concerns regarding the issue of locus and alleged misjoinder, noting that Chhail Bihari had himself posted similar tweets three days after Chadha’s posts.
During the hearing, a member from the legal team of Senior Advocate Rebecca John appeared virtually to inform the bench that Senior Advocate John represents Satyendra Jain in the matter.
Justice Dudeja remarked that it was unclear whether arguments from both sides had been concluded in the present case and thereby directed the matter to be listed for hearing on August 7, 2025, at 3:30 PM.
Case Title: Raghav Chadha v Chhail Bihari Goswami And Satyendra Kumar Jain v State (CRL.M.C. - 8484/2023 and CRL.M.C. - 8514/2023)