On February 6, 2025, the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi scrutinized the maintainability of a defamation complaint filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendra Jain against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate Karnail Singh. The court questioned whether the Special MP-MLA Court, typically reserved for cases against elected representatives, could hear a complaint filed by a former legislator like Jain.
Judge Paras Dalal stated:
“How is this complaint maintainable here? This court hears cases against MP/MLAs.”
Read Also:- Supreme Court Condemns False Allegations of Misrepresentation, Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Cost
Jain’s counsel, Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, cited a Delhi High Court ruling permitting former MLAs to file complaints in the Special Court. The court has requested the judgment for review, with the next hearing scheduled for February 19, 2025
Background of the Defamation Allegations
Satyendra Jain, a former Delhi Minister embroiled in multiple legal cases, accused Karnail Singh of making defamatory remarks during a televised interview on January 19, 2025. The allegations include:
Read Also:- Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Rape and Kidnapping, Citing Marriage and Children
Gold Recovery Claims: Singh allegedly stated that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) recovered 37 kg of gold from Jain’s residence.
Land Ownership Accusations: Jain was accused of owning 1,100 acres of land acquired through corruption.
“Bhoo Mafia” Label: Singh reportedly labeled Jain a “land mafia” and suggested he would “return to jail”
Jain’s complaint, filed through Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, asserts that these statements damaged his reputation and diverted public funds.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Questions Advocate-on-Record's Authority to Delegate Arguments
The court’s primary concern revolves around jurisdiction. The Special MP-MLA Court is designed to handle cases against sitting or former legislators, not those initiated by them. Jain’s legal team argues that the Delhi High Court’s precedent allows former MLAs to file complaints in this forum.
Advocate Kaustubh Khanna (representing Jain) emphasized:
“The High Court’s ruling supports our position. We will submit the judgment to clarify jurisdictional validity.”