.png){kind=small}
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
4 days ago
6
ARTICLE AD BOX
BJP's Telangana unit, represented by its general secretary, filed a complaint in May 2024 against Reddy, alleging that he delivered a defamatory and provocative speech against the party.(File)
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by a Telangana BJP leader, Kasam Venkateshwarlu, challenging a Telangana High Court order which quashed a complaint seeking criminal defamation proceedings against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy over his comments during a 2024 poll campaign.
While presiding over a three-judge bench, Chief Justice B R Gavai rejected the appeal by Venkateshwarlu, Telangana BJP General Secretary, over Reddy’s statements that the Bharatiya Janata Party will abolish reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) if it gets 400 seats in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
The bench also comprised Justices K Vinod Chandran and Atul S Chandurkar.
Appearing for the appellant, Senior Advocate Ranjith Kumar tried to urge the bench to entertain the plea, but CJI Gavai said, “We have repeated on many occasions, courts cannot be converted into political battlegrounds.”
As Kumar sought to continue his submissions, CJI Gavai added, “If you are in politics, you should have a thick skin. Dismissed.”
Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, representing Reddy, said there can be no political discourse if this is defamation. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Guru Krishnakumar, appearing for BJP’s Kasam Venkateshwarlu, said the Telangana High Court had contradicted itself, but the bench refused to entertain the plea any further.
Following Reddy’s speech, Kasam Venkateshwarlu moved a magistrate’s court with a criminal defamation complaint and the court directed institution of case under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951.
Story continues below this ad
Quashing it, the Telangana High Court said in August the alleged remarks were “against the National BJP Party, and BJP (Telangana) could not be considered a ‘person aggrieved’ under section 199(1) of the CrPC”. The court added that the petitioner “had filed the complaint in his individual capacity, and nowhere in the complaint was it mentioned that he should be considered as an aggrieved person due to being a member of the BJP. “
English (US) ·