The Court docket‘s order came on a crook defamation complaint filed in opposition to Arvind Kejriwalthrough a constable of Govindpuri Police Station. (Record photo)
NEW DELHI: The term “thulla” used by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal changed into made as regards to the Delhi Police officers who are “inefficient”, have “low productiveness rate” and take money from streetproviders, a Court in New Delhi has said whilst disregarding a criminal defamation complaint in opposition to the AAP leader.
“It has no longer been said by the respondent (Kejriwal) that each one Delhi Police Employees are thulla.Alternatively, using word ‘koi’ (someone) earlier than ‘thulla’ genuinely indicates that the said imputation is neither directed in the direction of complainant in my view nor towards complete of Delhi Police as a category however in the direction of an indeterminate and unidentifiable class of Law enforcement officials of Delhi Police who’re having lower productivity charge than other reasonable Delhi Police officers,” Metropolitan Justice of the Peace Arun Kumar Garg stated, in his order.
The Courtroom‘s order got here on a crook defamation grievance filed in opposition to Mr Kejriwal via a constable of Govindpuri Police Station who had claimed he become insulted by using the Chief minister’sCommentary in a Tv interview wherein he had referred to police as “thulla”.
The Courtroom, while disregarding the criticism, stated, “To be greater unique the said phrase appearsto were made close to the ones Police officers who lack in efficiency and indulge in taking money from rehdi patri walas.”
It also stated the announcement given by way of Mr Kejriwal throughout his interview on a Televisionchannel on July 17, it is “not according to se defamatory in as a lot because the which means of time period ‘thulla’ shows that it’s miles relative term to indicate the performance stage of a employee againstfellow people.”
“it’s far neither directed to the complainant in my opinion nor to complete Delhi Police as a class but to an indeterminate and unidentifiable elegance of inefficient and corrupt police officials. Hence, there are noenough grounds to proceed similarly towards the respondent (Kejriwal) and to summon him under section500 of the IPC,” the Courtroom said.
Inside the order, the Magistrate also stated the current Ideal Court docket verdict on pleas challengingconstitutionality of provisions of defamation law.
The Court additionally stated earlier than the complainant can keep a grievance below phase 499/500 (defamation) of the IPC as a member of Delhi Police, he ought to show that the alleged defamatory imputation ‘thulla’ turned into directed against whole Delhi Police.
The Court docket stated, “it is a settled felony function that so that it will determine whether or not a selected word is defamatory or now not, the declaration desires to be examine as an entire and no wordmay be read in isolation out of the context,” it stated.
It additionally rejected the rivalry of the complainant that on the degree of summoning an accused, theCourt have to not scrutinise the evidence in top notch detail.
“on the stage of summoning an accused for any offence, this Court docket is obligation sure to carefullyexamine the fabric available earlier than it. The Court can’t be a silent spectator and need to be circumspect while summoning an accused for a criminal offence in order that it does now not become antool of oppression and needless harassment of any citizen In the fingers of a personal complainant,” itstated.
The dismissal of this complaint may have come as a comfort for Mr Kejriwal, however he has already been summoned for July 14 on a comparable plea of a constable of Lajpat Nagar police station with the aid of aCourt docket which held that prima facie he committed the offence of defamation.
Constable Harvinder, complainant Inside the gift grievance, had sought summoning of Mr Kejriwal Within the case for the alleged offence beneath segment 500 (defamation) and 504 (insult intended to provokebreach of peace) of IPC contending that the phrase used by him had demoralised the complete policeorganization.
The plea, filed via legal professional LN Rao, had contended that “using a derogatory and demeaning termlike ‘thulla’ to consult police Employees is equivalent to regarding all Delhi Police officers as lethargic and unproductive.”
“This word has, consequently, harmed the reputation of the complainant Within the eyes of general publicinclusive of his family, relative and friends,” it had claimed.
