‘Political speeches are often exaggerated': Telangana HC quashes criminal defamation against CM Revanth Reddy

Indian Express

2 days ago

The Telangana High Court Friday quashed a criminal defamation case against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy. The case stems from remarks made by the CM against the BJP during the Lok Sabha election campaign at Kothagudem in May 2024.
On Friday, the Bench of Justice Lakshman allowed the petition filed by Reddy to quash the proceedings against him in the case pending trial before a Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (JFCM) for Excise cases (designated MP-MLA court) in Hyderabad. He was booked under Section 499 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 125 (promoting enmity between classes in connection with an election) of the Representation of the People Act.
The complainant, Telangana BJP unit represented by its General Secretary Kasam Venkateshwarlu, contended that the statements, such as 'the BJP, if voted to power, would change the Constitution and abolish reservations to SC/ST and BC communities', were part of a 'fake and dubious political narrative' to confuse voters and promote enmity between communities. The BJP alleged that the speech lowered the party's reputation and caused damage during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
The Special JFCM for excise cases in August 2024 had issued a summons to Revanth Reddy, asking him to appear personally before it. Subsequently, the chief minister approached the high court challenging the complaint and seeking to stay the proceedings initiated against him. The high court had earlier granted him an exemption from personal appearance before the trial court.
The petitioner's counsel, T Niranjan Reddy, informed the court that political speeches should not be the subject of defamation, 'as elections inherently involve parties seeking to lower each other's reputation.'
He said the 'alleged speech is a routine activity of a political leader to criticise the opposition and is not defamation,' and that such speeches are protected under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner, among other allegations, argued that the complaint was filed with a political vendetta to harass the petitioner and constitutes an abuse of the legal process.
On his part, the counsel for the respondent, Devineni Vijay Kumar, argued that the statements created mistrust and fear among voters, bringing disrepute to the BJP.
After hearing both sides, the court rejected the contention of the petitioner that political parties do not enjoy reputation and cannot maintain a complaint for criminal defamation. The court also found neither the complainant (BJP Telangana) nor its representative, Kasam Venkateshwarlu, was authorised by the national unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party to file the complaint.
Refraining from discussing the contents of the alleged speech and the issue of its defamatory nature, the court noted, 'Political speeches are often exaggerated. To allege that such speeches are defamatory is another exaggeration.'
'It is trite law that, power of quashing should be exercised very sparingly and circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. However, where the initiation of criminal proceedings suffers from material defects or where such criminal proceedings constitute abuse of process, the inherent powers can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings,' the court stated in the order.