Delhi Court summons Olympic medalist wrestler Bajrang Punia in a defamation case
Aug 03, 2023
New Delhi [India], August 3 : The Patiala House Court of Delhi on Thursday summoned Olympic medalist wrestler Bajrang Punia in a defamation case filed by Naresh Dahiya (a Wrestling coach). The Court of Delhi summoned Bajrang Punia as an accused on September 6, 2023.
Complainant Naresh Dahiya, through a criminal defamation complaint, stated that during the protest at Jantar Mantar on May 10, 2023, Bajrang Punia made a defamatory remarks against him in a press conference.
The court noted that the relevant extracts reveal that the accused, Bajrang Punia, had made a reference about a rape case ongoing against the complainant (Naresh Dahiya) in Tis Hazari Court.
The accused referred to the complainant by name and stated that the complainant has no credibility to oppose the protest as he was himself facing a rape case.
But during the Court witness recording, the complainant categorically deposed that he was acquitted in the said rape case in 2019 itself, and the said fact was well known to the accused as well, who is a part of the same fraternity.
Metropolitan Magistrate Yashdeep Chahal, while issuing summons to Bajrang Punia, stated that, on consideration of the complaint, supporting documents, and presummoning evidence, I am of the prima facie view that all the ingredients of defamation are made out.
It appears that the statement made in the press conference was a result of malicious intent and was not made in good faith. In view of the same, let the accused, namely, Bajrang Punia be summoned for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 499 read with Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
However, the court clarified that at the stage of summoning, it is fairly settled that the Court is not required to go into a comparative analysis of the possible defence that may be taken by the accused.
Advocates Sudhir Nagar, Ashish Tanwar, Rajesh Rexwal, and Ravinder Singh appeared for complainant Naresh Dahiya and submitted that the fact of acquittal was well known and a malicious attack was made by the accused to tarnish the reputation as well as the credibility of the complainant for the sole reason of dissuading him from supporting the WFI President in the protest.
