Supreme Court Upholds Medha Patkar's Conviction in Defamation Case

Court Ruling on Medha Patkar's Defamation Case

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the conviction of activist Medha Patkar regarding a defamation lawsuit that dates back 24 years, as reported by a legal news outlet.

A panel consisting of Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh did, however, annul the imposed penalty of Rs 1 lakh on Patkar. Additionally, they altered the probation requirement that mandated her periodic appearances in court, allowing her instead to provide bonds.

The defamation suit was initiated in 2001 when VK Saxena, then leading the National Council for Civil Liberties in Ahmedabad, accused Patkar of defaming him through a press release titled “True face of patriot,” which she had issued in November 2000.

Initially filed in an Ahmedabad court, the case was moved to the chief metropolitan magistrate’s court in Delhi in 2003. Patkar entered a not guilty plea in 2013.

In May 2024, Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma found Patkar guilty of criminal defamation, sentencing her to two years in prison, a fine, or both.

On April 2, Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Singh upheld the conviction. However, on April 8, he granted Patkar a year of probation, stating that her offense did not warrant imprisonment.

Despite this, Patkar was expected to appear in court on April 23 to submit probation bonds and pay the fine. Her failure to comply led to Singh issuing a non-bailable warrant, citing her deliberate disregard for court orders.

Patkar was arrested on April 25 but was released shortly after, as her attorney assured the court that the probation order remained valid and that she would fulfill the bond requirements.

Previously, Patkar had appealed her conviction in the Delhi High Court.

On July 29, the High Court affirmed Patkar’s conviction, stating that there was no illegality in the trial and appellate court's decisions, which were made after careful consideration of the evidence and applicable law.

The May 2024 ruling indicated that Patkar's press release constituted a direct assault on Saxena's character and national loyalty.

The court noted that Patkar accused Saxena of compromising the interests of Gujarat's populace and resources for foreign entities, labeling this allegation as a severe attack on his integrity and public service.

“Such claims are particularly serious in the public domain, where patriotism is held in high regard, and questioning an individual's bravery and national allegiance can irreparably harm their public reputation and social standing,” the court remarked.