Nirmala sitharaman in defamation case: Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman told a Delhi court on Thursday (June 26) that Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Somnath Bharti cannot legally advocate his wife in a defamation case due to a conflict of interest.
Bharti’s wife Lipika Mitra filed a criminal complaint in the court alleging defamation against Sitharaman. Sitharaman’s lawyer argued in the court that Representing Somnath Bharti in Mitra’s complaint is a conflict of interest, as Mitra is the wife of Bharti, who alleged that the minister’s alleged speech has damaged her husband’s reputation.
Union minister’s lawyer argued in court
Sitharaman’s lawyer said that Bharti cannot appear in his own case and he should withdraw his adipation, otherwise the Bar Council of India (BCI) should be asked to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. After seeking time to debate the application from Bharti, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Paras Dalal fixed the date of hearing 16 July.
The court issued notice against the Union Minister on May 19
The judge issued a notice to Sitharaman on 19 May. It was said in this notice that the accused should be given an opportunity to hear. The judge said, “A new case has been received against the complainant in print and electronic media to make and publish abusive and defamable comments. It should be investigated and it should be recorded. ”The judge passed this order after issuing notice to Sitharaman/hearing arguments on the subject of cognizance.
Sitharaman accused of making false, derogatory and malicious statements
The complaint claimed that Union Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made derogatory, false and malicious statements in a press conference on May 17, 2024, whose sole purpose was to tarnish Bharati’s reputation and weaken her chances of victory in general elections.
According to the complaint, these statements were given only to harm the reputation of the complainant and her husband, so that the BJP candidate in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and political loss to the complainant’s husband.
It said that the accused talked about the family feud between the complainant and her husband, but did not inform them about living together again.