HC relief for Irani, case to continue against Nirupam

New Delhi: In a relief to Union minister Smriti Irani, the Delhi High Court Wednesday quashed the criminal defamation proceedings against her, initiated on a complaint by Congress leader Sanjay Nirupam, saying continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process of law. It however dismissed Nirupam's plea, seeking the quashing of summons issued by a trial court against him in a criminal defamation complaint filed by Irani.

Both the complaints arose out of the same incident which occurred during a TV debate on analysing poll results in 2012.

Justice R K Gauba, who gave two separate verdicts, did not mention the actual names of Irani and Nirupam in the judgment and cause list. While Irani was referred as 'PQR' in the judgment, Nirupam was addressed as 'XYZ'.

"The petitioner and the second respondent have been in public life for quite long, engaged in active politics and associated with the political parties that generally have been seen to be opposed to each other. In their interest, their names have been withheld from mention, including in the cause-title," the judge said in the opening paragraph of both the judgements. In her plea, Irani had sought quashing of the summons issued to her by a trial court on June 6, 2014. She had also sought quashing of the complaint filed by Nirupam.

Nirupam had challenged a magisterial court's March 11, 2013 order summoning him in Irani's defamation complaint against him. He had also sought quashing of the January 1, 2013 complaint filed by Irani.

The high court said it was clear that the criminal complaint leading to the summoning order against Irani was instituted by Nirupam in the counter-blast to the complaint of the BJP leader, there being no explanation offered for the delay.

"The continuance of such criminal prosecution on the basis of available material would be an abuse of the process of law," it said.

It said the drift of the discussion which led to the verbal heated exchange does show that Irani was trying to block the criticism levelled by

Nirupam against the performance of the political party to which she belonged, and in that process she questioned his credentials by referring to the history of he having switched loyalties.