"To Verify Date of Attestation": Delhi Court summons Notary in Dhruv Rathee Defamation Case Over Document Irregularity
A Delhi Court on Friday summoned a notary public in BJP leader Suresh Nakhua’s ongoing defamation case against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee, after serious questions were raised about the authenticity of a key certificate filed under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
As per the tweet of the BJP leader, the notary has been summoned to verify the date of attestation of documents, which is dated January 27.
District Judge Gunjan Gupta of Saket District Court directed the notary, who attested the certificate under Section 63 (admissibility of electronic records), to appear on August 8.
The order came after Rathee’s counsel's flagged that the document bore the date January 26, Republic Day, a gazetted holiday, raising suspicion. They also noted that the notary’s stamp carried no date of attestation. “These repeated irregularities warrant the notary's appearance before this Court,” Verma submitted.
Counsel appearing for Nakhua, called the January 26 date a clerical error and claimed the document was in fact attested on January 27. He also pointed out procedural defects in Rathee’s own filings and was permitted by the Court to place relevant case law on record.
The controversy arises from a defamation suit filed by Nakhua, BJP Mumbai spokesperson, over a July 7 YouTube video posted by Rathee titled “My Reply to Godi Youtubers | Elvish Yadav | Dhruv Rathee.” Nakhua claims the video falsely brands him a “violent and abusive troll” without justification, damaging his personal and professional reputation.
Nakhua's post, which Rathee discussed in his video, contained offensive language. Rathee challenged the assertion that referring to Nakhua as an ‘abusive troll’ was defamatory, arguing that such comments were justified given Nakhua's own conduct.
During Friday’s hearing, the Court also took up Rathee’s applications seeking dismissal of the suit. Verma argued that Rathee’s remarks were based on Nakhua’s own tweets, asserting that the defence of truth is available and precludes any injunctive relief.
“If the statement is justified and based on facts, there can be no injunction,” Verma argued, adding that Rathee’s video did not make baseless claims but relied on public conduct.
In response, Sharma countered that the video was a targeted attack and that Rathee had no basis to call Nakhua abusive or violent. “I am 55% disabled. It is humanly impossible for me to be violent,” Sharma said on Nakhua’s behalf.
The matter will now resume on August 8.
Notably, in July 2024, the Delhi Court had summoned Dhruv Rathee in the defamation suit. The Court had issued the notice and informed Rathee of Nakhua's request for interim relief. Nakhua argued that Rathee's video aimed to damage his reputation and social standing by spreading false accusations and creating unwarranted connections.
Case Title: Suresh Karamshi Nakhua v. Dhruv Rathee and Ors.
Hearing Date: August 1, 2025
Bench: District Judge Gunjan Gupta