The Gujarat High Court reserved its verdict after hearing Arvind Kejriwal’s plea seeking a separate trial from AAP leader Sanjay Singh in a criminal defamation case filed by Gujarat University. The bench highlighted that the alleged defamatory statements by both leaders arose from a continuous sequence of actions, raising questions on whether joint trials can be split.
Kejriwal and Singh face a criminal defamation complaint over remarks made about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s educational degrees, allegedly delivered at press conferences on April 1 and 2, 2023, shortly after a High Court order quashing a 2016 CIC directive. Kejriwal challenged a magistrate and Sessions Court order rejecting his request for separate trials, arguing that the incidents, videos, and Twitter accounts involved were distinct.
The University countered that the statements, timing, and evidence reflected continuity and a common purpose, making them part of the same transaction under Section 223 CrPC.
The Sessions Court had earlier ruled that “If they are animated by a common purpose, and there is a continuity in their action, then surely there is one transaction so far as they are concerned.” The High Court reiterated this principle, noting that the press statements and related social media activity constituted a continuous defamatory act. While the verdict is reserved, the court stressed that the joint trial framework under Section 223 CrPC applies where offences are linked by continuity, purpose, and evidence.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
