Medha Patkar shocked in defamation case, Supreme Court remains sentenced

New Delhi

The Supreme Court has not given any relief to social activist Medha Patkar in the defamation case filed by Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena 25 years ago. The court has refused to intervene in the Delhi High Court order, keeping his conviction and punishment.

A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh said that we are not willing to intervene in the Delhi High Court order in the case. The High Court released Patkar on the probation of good conduct, but he needed to appear in the lower court once every three years. The bench said that the fine imposed keeping in mind the plea of the petitioner's counsel has been canceled.

Delhi's Lt. Governor VK Saxena filed a defamation case against Narmada Bachao Andolan leader Medha Patkar on 24 November 2000. Then Saxena was the head of an NGO (NGO) in Gujarat. In the case, the Magistrate Court on 1 July 2024 sentenced Patkar to be convicted under Section 500 (defamation) of the IPC and sentenced him to a five -month simple imprisonment and fined Rs 10 lakh.

The magistrate court had admitted that Patkar's statements were not only a defaulter, but were designed to incite negative perceptions about him. The allegation made by Medha Patkar that the complainant is mortgaging the people of Gujarat and their resources for foreign interests, his honesty and public service is a direct attack. After this, the order of the magistrate was challenged by Medha Patkar in the Sessions Court.

On April 2, the Sessions Court dismissed the petition of Medha Patkar. The court had said that Patkar was convicted. The court had said that there was no fact in the appeal against his decision of conviction in the defamation case. The Sessions Court, while retaining Patkar's conviction in the case, had released him on the probation of good conduct for filling a probation bond of Rs 25,000 on April 8 and imposed a condition to deposit a fine of Rs 1 lakh on him.

After this, the order of the Sessions Court was challenged by Patkar in the Delhi High Court. The High Court in the case had said that the findings of the lower court had illegal or physical irregularity. The order of conviction was passed after considering the evidence and the applied law properly. It was said that the procedure adopted failed to show any fault or an error in the law, resulting in a failure of justice. The High Court also upheld the order of sentence. In this, Patkar was released on the probation of good conduct.

However, the High Court amended the condition of probation imposed by the lower court, under which Patkar was made mandatory to appear in the lower court once every three months and allowed them to be represented either physically or through video conferencing or represented through a lawyer during a muscle. Now the Supreme Court has also upheld his conviction. However, the fine was canceled.