The Delhi High Court has issued a significant order directing Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Jairam Ramesh, and Pawan Khera to remove tweets alleging misconduct by veteran journalist Rajat Sharma during a televised debate. The order comes in response to a defamation suit filed by Rajat Sharma following claims made against him on social media platforms.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, presiding over a single-judge bench, issued an interim order on June 14 under Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC. The court found that the social media posts and tweets in question, if allowed to remain public, could cause irreparable harm to Rajat Sharma's reputation. The court reviewed the video of the debate and concluded that the allegations of abusive language against Sharma were unsubstantiated. According to the court, Sharma had only briefly intervened in the debate without using any abusive language.
The court emphasized the importance of truthfulness in public discourse, noting that while freedom of speech is essential, it should not be used to propagate misleading or exaggerated information. It deemed the criticism against Sharma as sensationalized and misleading.In compliance with the Intermediary Guidelines, the court ordered the defendants to remove the contested posts and tweets within seven days. Additionally, it directed that any videos related to the incident be made private and not shared publicly without court permission until further notice.
The court also issued summons to the Congress leaders named in Sharma's defamation suit and scheduled the next hearing for July 11. Rajat Sharma has sought damages of ₹100 crore under Section 500 of the IPC for defamation.
This legal development follows a series of events triggered by the circulation of a video clip alleging inappropriate conduct by Sharma during a televised discussion on India TV. Subsequently, Ragini Nayak had posted the video online, claiming misconduct by Sharma, which led to a police complaint against him.
In response, Rajat Sharma denounced these allegations as baseless and accused the Congress party’s media cell of orchestrating a false campaign against him. He warned of potential defamation charges should these falsehoods persist.
The case underscores the ongoing challenges of maintaining factual accuracy in digital discourse and the legal consequences of spreading unverified claims through social media platforms.The Delhi High Court's intervention serves as a reminder of the responsibilities associated with freedom of expression, emphasizing the need for truthful and responsible communication in the public domain.
