Overview
- Judicial Magistrate First Class Raghav Sharma at Saket Courts held the complainant failed to prove defamation beyond reasonable doubt under Section 500 of the IPC.
- The court noted Patkar’s name appeared only in the headline of the advertisement and found substantive allegations were directed at the Narmada Bachao Andolan and named individuals such as Chittaroopa Palit.
- Citing Supreme Court precedents, the order said a loose, voluntary movement like the NBA lacks a definable legal identity, so its leaders cannot claim personal defamation on its behalf.
- The judgment flagged irreconcilable contradictions in Patkar’s testimony, including shifting positions on a letter linked to NBA activities, which diminished her credibility.
- Filed in Ahmedabad after the November 10, 2000 publication and transferred to Delhi in 2010 on Supreme Court directions, the case’s outcome follows Patkar’s January 24 acquittal in a separate 2006-related case and earlier mixed rulings in their long-running legal tussle.