Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court has recently dismissed a plea filed by shooter Vartika Singh challenging the Sultanpur Special MP/MLA Court's October 2022 decision to reject her defamation complaint against Union Cabinet Minister Smriti Zubin Irani.

Court held that there was no sufficient material/ground for the trial court to proceed further against Irani.

"I find that the trial court has given cogent reasons for not summoning the opposite party no. 2 to face trial under section 499/500 IPC," held the bench of Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan.

Vartika Singh filed a Section 482 CrPC plea, claiming that despite presenting herself and her witnesses, and the trial court ordering an investigation, her complaint was dismissed under Section 203 CrPC without sufficient reasons.

At the stage of summoning meticulous exercise of appreciation of evidence is not warranted and the duty of the court is only to see if there is prima facie material available on the basis of which an accused person may be put on trial and the evidence is not required as it is warranted at the time of conviction of an accused person of the crime, Singh's counsel contended. 

The allegations in Singh's complaint were that Irani gave defamatory statements to print and electronic media regarding Singh that damaged her reputation. She claimed that Irani's remarks that Singh has a close association with the Congress party which was using her as its pawn, lowered her public image.

On the other hand, the plea was opposed by the Additional Government Advocate who argued that Singh herself was accused in five criminal cases, therefore, she may be termed as a person having criminal antecedents.

Moreover, even if the association of the applicant (Singh) is shown with any political family, the same by itself may not be a defamatory statement, the AGA contended. 

The high court noted that the statements, that Singh referred to in her complaint, were made by Irani in response to the questions asked by the media on June 26, 2020, at her camp office in Amethi, Uttar Pradesh.

Court also highlighted the police report submitted in pursuance of the trial court's order by the in-charge SHO of the police station Gauriganj, district Amethi which stated that Irani had not taken the name of any person in her statements to the media and she had only referred to Congress party. 

"To constitute defamation under section 499 IPC, there has to be an imputation and such imputation must have been made with an intention of harming or having reason to believe that it will harm to the reputation of a person about whom it is made," the high court said. 

Referring to Irani's statements, court held that those were part of a long interaction with media persons and when taken conjointly, they showed that Irani's intention was only to criticize a political party and not to make any imputation against Singh. 

Further, court stressed that summoning in a criminal trial is a serious business and it is not so that by referring the statements of complainant and few witnesses the trial court should summon the proposed accused person to face trial. 

"...as being summoned to face trial in a criminal case would also place a stigma on the person who is being summoned to face trial and even if he/she is acquitted of the charges after many years of painful trial, the same may not be of any use," it added. 

Therefore, court held that it did not find any illegality or infirmity in the trial court's order and accordingly, dismissed Singh's plea. 

It opined that Singh, being a shooter of international fame and standard, may be ideal to many youngsters, and merely by the impugned statements her reputation was not likely to be tarnished.

Notably, earlier Singh had sought registration of an FIR against Union minister Smriti Irani and others for allegedly demanding Rs. 25 Lakhs to make Singh a member of the Central Women's Commission. She had claimed that in collusion with Minister Smriti Irani, Vijay Gupta, the personal secretary of the minister and one Rajnish Singh tried to dupe Rs 25 lakh from her to make her a member of the State Women's Commission.

Singh had previously sought registration of an FIR against Union Minister Smriti Irani and others, accusing them of demanding Rs. 25 Lakhs to secure her membership in the Central Women's Commission. Allegedly, Singh claimed that Minister Smriti Irani, along with Vijay Gupta,her personal secretary and one Rajnish Singh, attempted to deceive her into paying the sum for State Women's Commission membership.

Yet, the Special Judge (MP/MLA Court), Sultanpur, refused to order an FIR, and this decision was upheld by the high court in July 2022.

Case Title: Vartika Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home. Lucknow And Another