Develop tolerance, laugh off criticism: Supreme Court to politicians
, ET Bureau|
Feb 20, 2018, 07.58 AM IST
NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Monday advised political leaders of all shades and those in public life to develop thicker skin and laugh off criticism targeted at them, instead of running to courts every time raising defamation pleas.
“This is not defamation,” CJI Misra, told senior advocate Jayant Bhushan when he tried to object to a YSR Congress Party MLA not being allowed to file a defamation case in a lower court on behalf of party chief YS Jaganmohan Reddy against a local newspaper.
The newspaper had alleged that Jaganmohan Reddy, who met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in May last year to raise the issue of the plight of farmers in Andhra Pradesh, had actually met the latter to discuss his woes over investigative agencies probing his disproportionate assets.
‘Andhra Jyothi’, allegedly close to a rival political party, stated that Reddy had met the PM to discuss some personal issues.
The lower court had refused Mangalagiri MLA Rama Krishna Reddy permission to file a complaint on behalf of his party leader. The Andhra Pradesh High Court had upheld the decision as only the person affected by the defamatory statements can file an FIR and not a third party.
The MLA then appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court order. Arguing the MLA’s case, Bhushan said any defamatory statement against the party chief was a defamatory statement against a party MLA. He insisted that the particular publication repeatedly keeps defaming the party leader. “If the party leader is defamed, how am I not defamed?” he asked. “The paper made a false representation that he had not raised the problems of the state,” he argued.
But the High Court dismissed it on the ground that he lacked locus. A three-judge Supreme Court bench, led by CJI Dipak Misra, rejected his plea, saying those in public life should not be so sensitive to such “write-ups”.
“You must develop some tolerance for write-ups. Just read it and laugh it off,” it said. Bhushan insisted that the High Court had, while dismissing the plea, gone into the merits of the case. That should at least be removed, he argued. But the CJI dismissed the case. “Our conscience must provoke us into believing that it was defamatory,” he said. In fact, filing a case may actually harm the man by attracting more publicity, the CJI said, refusing to overturn the High Court decision.
“This is not defamation,” CJI Misra, told senior advocate Jayant Bhushan when he tried to object to a YSR Congress Party MLA not being allowed to file a defamation case in a lower court on behalf of party chief YS Jaganmohan Reddy against a local newspaper.
The newspaper had alleged that Jaganmohan Reddy, who met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in May last year to raise the issue of the plight of farmers in Andhra Pradesh, had actually met the latter to discuss his woes over investigative agencies probing his disproportionate assets.
‘Andhra Jyothi’, allegedly close to a rival political party, stated that Reddy had met the PM to discuss some personal issues.
The lower court had refused Mangalagiri MLA Rama Krishna Reddy permission to file a complaint on behalf of his party leader. The Andhra Pradesh High Court had upheld the decision as only the person affected by the defamatory statements can file an FIR and not a third party.
The MLA then appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court order. Arguing the MLA’s case, Bhushan said any defamatory statement against the party chief was a defamatory statement against a party MLA. He insisted that the particular publication repeatedly keeps defaming the party leader. “If the party leader is defamed, how am I not defamed?” he asked. “The paper made a false representation that he had not raised the problems of the state,” he argued.
But the High Court dismissed it on the ground that he lacked locus. A three-judge Supreme Court bench, led by CJI Dipak Misra, rejected his plea, saying those in public life should not be so sensitive to such “write-ups”.
“You must develop some tolerance for write-ups. Just read it and laugh it off,” it said. Bhushan insisted that the High Court had, while dismissing the plea, gone into the merits of the case. That should at least be removed, he argued. But the CJI dismissed the case. “Our conscience must provoke us into believing that it was defamatory,” he said. In fact, filing a case may actually harm the man by attracting more publicity, the CJI said, refusing to overturn the High Court decision.
