Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

Mahua Moitra's failure to disclose her interactions with Darshan Hiranandani, along with her inadequate justification for sharing her login credentials and accepting gifts from him, undermine her case for interim injunctions, especially in light of the Ethics Committee's report. 

The Delhi High Court, in an order dated March 4 2024, dismissed the suit of Mahua Moitra seeking injunction against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey and Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai against publication of defamatory statements against her citing lack of evidence to substantiate prima facie case of interim injunctions. 

Advocate Samudra Sarangi appeared for the Plaintiff and Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari appeared for the Defendants. 

The Bench of Justice Sachin Datta held, “the matter acquires a completely different complexion on account of the aspects noted hereinabove viz., (i) the omission on the part of the plaintiff to disclose in the plaint her dealings with Shri Darshan Hiranandani and/ or the background and rationale of sharing of her login credentials; (ii) the plaintiff’s own public statements/ admissions, as brought out by the defendants, regarding sharing of her login credentials with Shri Darshan Hiranandani and receipt of several gifts from him; (iii) the report of the Ethics Committee of the Lok Sabha; (iv) the affidavit of Shri Darshan Hiranandani himself, which has been placed on record in these proceedings,and which has also been copiously referred to in the report of the Ethics Committee of the Lok Sabha”. 

Mahua Moitra filed a suit seeking permanent injunctions against the Defendants for posting defamatory content and contended that such publications irreparably damaged her reputation and career. She also sought removal of such content, publication of retractions and apologies, withdrawal of certain letters, damages and costs of the suit. 

The Defendant, however, contended that the publication was intended to report unethical conduct to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, citing parliamentary rules. The Defendant also argued that the allegations in the letter were true and substantiated by evidence, including an affidavit and a report from the Ethics Committee of the Lok Sabha. 

The Court noted that per the Ethics Committee Report of the Lok Sabha dated November 09 2023 Mahua Moitra, MP shared her Lok Sabha login credentials with Darshan Hiranandani, a businessman based in Dubai, UAE.
The login credentials were accessed from Dubai on multiple occasions while Moitra was there, suggesting unauthorized access. A consistent IP address was used for accessing the login credentials from Dubai. Darshan Hiranandani confirmed gifting luxury items and providing other amenities to Moitra in a sworn affidavit. Moitra's actions were deemed to constitute "Unethical Conduct," breach of parliamentary privileges, and contempt of the House.

The Court emphasized that while injunctions are typically used to prevent reputational damage from defamatory publications. “It is undoubtedly true that Courts must come down heavily on defamatory statements made with reckless disregard for truth involving a public figure… this Court must grant injunctive orders to prevent irreparable damage in cases where if the defamatory publications are allowed to be propagated/circulated, will sully the reputation earned over a period of several decades”, the Court noted. 

However, the Court observed the plaintiff’s failure to disclose her interactions with Darshan Hiranandani along with the report of the Ethics Committee. The Court held that the Plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case for interim injunction. 

Case Title: Mahua Moitra v Nishikant Dubey & Ors. (2024:DHC:1771)