Delhi High Court reserves order on AAP leader's plea in Jaitley's defamation case

Bajpai's contention that he was not heard by the trial court before framing of notice against him was opposed by Jaitley's counsel who submitted that in a summons case, there was no concept of hearing an accused at the stage of framing of notice or before that.

Justice I S Mehta, after hearing the arguments of the counsel for Jaitley and Bajpai, reserved the order on the APP leader's petition.

Advocate Prashant Mendiratta, appearing for Bajpai, said the AAP leader resides outside the jurisdiction of the trial court and cannot be summoned by it without an inquiry under the CrPC, which was not done in this case.

He said he was not given an opportunity to be heard and claimed that the trial court order framing notice against him in the defamation case was "bad in law".

However, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Jaitley, said there was a gross delay in filing the petition and the application for condonation of delay does not comply with the proposition of law under the Limitation Act which says that each day's delay must be explained.

"The application is false to the knowledge of petitioner (Bajpai)... and he is liable for perjury," the counsel said.

Luthra also apprised the court of an order passed by another bench of the high court dismissing AAP leader Raghav Chadha's plea that he cannot be made to face a criminal case only for retweeting Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's tweet against Jaitley in the DDCA row.

The high court was hearing a plea by Bajpai who along with others was put on trial in the defamation case, filed by Jaitley against Kejriwal and five other AAP leaders in the controversy surrounding the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA).

Bajpai has challenged the lower court order summoning and framing notice against him for the alleged offence of defamation. He has also challenged the order by which his application seeking to be heard on the point of notice was also rejected.

Jaitley's counsel has said the plea has been filed after over one-and-a half years which "establishes a clear case of malafide and a sorry attempt to delay the ongoing trial".

In an affidavit filed through advocate Manik Dogra, Jaitley said petitioner Bajpai has stated three events which according to him have resulted in delay in filing of the criminal revision petition. These are Punjab Assembly election, MCD elections of NCT Delhi and the Bawana by-poll.

"It is submitted that the Punjab legislative election were held on February 4, the MCD elections on April 23 and the Bawana by-poll on August 23," he said, adding the AAP leader has not given any plausible explanation for the delay during the intervening period.

Besides Kejriwal and Bajpai, the other AAP leaders accused in the case are Ashutosh, Kumar Vishwas, Sanjay Singh and Radhav Chadha.

Jaitley had filed the complaint alleging that the accused had defamed him in a controversy regarding DDCA which he headed for over a decade.

Earlier, Jaitley had appeared in the trial court and said that Kejriwal and five AAP leaders had made "false and defamatory" statements. He had rejected the charge that he had siphoned off money from DDCA for his own benefit.

Jaitley was the DDCA President from December 1999 to December 2013.

On December 21, 2015, he had filed the criminal defamation case against them and sought their prosecution for offences that entail a punishment of up to two years in jail.

A civil defamation suit was also filed by Jaitley before the Delhi High Court in the matter seeking Rs 10 crore as damages. Presently, Jaitley is being cross-examined by Kejriwal's counsel before the high court.