The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Friday refused to quash a defamation case filed against actor-turned-politician Kangana Ranaut in connection with her controversial tweet on the farmers' protests in 2021..In a social media post, Ranaut alleged that an elderly woman protester, Mahinder Kaur, was paid to take part in the agitation. The tweet reposted by Ranaut read:"Ha ha ha she is the same dadi who featured in Time magazine for being the most powerful Indian…And she is available in 100 rupees. Pakistani jurno’s have hijacked international PR for India in an embarrassing way. We need our own people to speak for us internationally."A Bench of Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya held that,"There are specific allegations against the petitioner (Kangana) who is a celebrity, that false and defamatory imputations by her in the retweet have dented the respondent’s reputation and lowered her in her own estimation, as also in the eyes of others. Therefore, filing of the complaint to vindicate her rights cannot be termed mala fide...In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the petition, and it stands dismissed.".The complaint alleged that Ranaut had made a defamatory retweet implying that an elderly woman farmer was fraudulently presented in the media for money. The tweet compared her to another activist and carried derogatory remarks, it said.Later, preliminary evidence was recorded, and the magistrate called for a report from Twitter (now X), which could not be furnished due to jurisdictional limitations. Thereafter, the magistrate summoned Ranaut based on the material on record. The actor moved the High Court against this summons..During the hearing, Ranaut's counsel contended that the summoning was improper due to the lack of the Twitter report, absence of mens rea and non-consideration of exceptions under Section 499 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was also argued that the magistrate misread the nature of the tweet and ignored the original author of the post. Kaur’s counsel, however, asserted that sufficient evidence was presented to establish a prima facie case of defamation, and that the magistrate rightly issued the summons after the failure of Twitter to provide the requested details..The Court held that the magistrate had rightly applied his mind, conducted the required inquiry, and found prima facie evidence of defamation."In the instant case, after inquiry the Magistrate was prima facie satisfied that the retweet was by the petitioner, and the facts alleged in the compliant would constitute the offence under Section 499 IPC. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the impugned order issuing process against her without a report by the TCIPL. The order has been passed after due application of mind to the facts of the case, by examining the preliminary evidence in the light of relevant provisions of law."It ruled that the report was not mandatory for the inquiry, and that Ranaut had not shown that the retweet qualified for any exceptions."...even if the Magistrate, under a misconception of law, refrained from looking into the Exceptions on the ground that it was not required to be done at the stage of issuing process, it is not fatal to the impugned order which has been passed after applying mind to the material on record in accordance with law, as already discussed."The Court also clarified that merely because the magistrate wrongly mentioned Ranaut’s retweet as a tweet in the impugned order, it cannot be said that the order is a result of non-application of mind..Advocates Abhinav Sood, Anmol Gupta, Achintaya Soni, Mehndi Singhal, Dhruv Chowfla and Nitesh Jha appeared for Ranaut.Senior Advocate GK Mann along with Advocates Aditya Dassaur and Armaan Sand appeared for Kaur..[Read Order]
