New Delhi [India], December 9 : Former Delhi Minister Satyender Jain has recently withdrawn his civil defamation suit filed against BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj from the Rohini court. He had filed this suit last year. Senior Civil Judge Gaurav allowed the withdrawal and disposed of the suit as withdrawn. "Plaintiff is the master of the suit and hence, is entitled to withdraw the same. In view of the above, the matter stands disposed off as withdrawn," Senior Civil Judge Gaurav Sharma ordered on December 6.
Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj and Karan Sharma appeared through video conferencing for Jain and stated that the plaintiff wishes to withdraw the present suit. In July this year, the BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj moved a plea seeking rejection of the civil Defamation suit filed by Jain.
Jain, in his suit, had stated that Bansuri Swaraj made defamatory remarks in an interview on a TV channel in October 2023. The Rohini court had issued a notice to Bansuri Swaraj and a TV news channel in December 2024. Jain had prayed for direction to the TV Channel for taking down the content in question and restraining her from making further statements. He has claimed damage of Re. One.
He had also filed a criminal defamation complaint against Bansuri Swaraj in the Rouse Avenue court. The same was dismissed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM); the appeal of the same is pending before the Sessions court. AAP leader and former Delhi Minister Satyendra Jain, in the Defamation complaint, had alleged that Swaraj had made defamatory remarks against him during an interview on a TV channel on October 5, 2023. This interview was watched by Millions of people.
He had claimed that these remarks were made by Bansuri Swaraj to defame him and to gain undue political advantage. Former Delhi Minister Jain had alleged that Bansuri Swaraj falsy stated that RS 3 crores were recovered from his house. She had also stated that 1.8 Kgs Gold and 133 gold coins were recovered from the house of the complainant, he has claimed.
It was also stated that this statement was made in context with the raid of the Enforcement Directorate at the complainant's house. He is on bail in this case, and the same is pending before the court. In furtherance of the vilification campaign, she further defamed him by calling him 'Corrupt' and 'Fraud'. Several false, malicious and defamatory allegations were levelled against the complainant, he alleged.
It was stated that the accused has played havoc with the reputation of the complainant and the smear campaign has caused a cascading effect on the complainant as husband, father, brother, friend and as a common of the society, apart from scarring his otherwise unblemished political reputation.
It was said that the damage and dent caused by the frivolous allegations levelled by the accused is immeasurable, as the complainant's character and reputation stands assailed not only as the elected representative and mass leader, but even in his personal capacity.