During a recent hearing, the Delhi High Court remarked that plotting against the Prime Minister amounts to treason, emphasizing the gravity of such actions. Justice Jasmeet Singh, presiding over the case, asserted that allegations of conspiracy against the Prime Minister must be based on substantial evidence and not made lightly.
The court’s remarks came amidst a defamation case filed by Biju Janata Dal MP Pinaki Mishra against lawyer Jai Anant Dehadray. Dehadray stands accused of accusing Mishra of involvement in a conspiracy against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Justice Singh cautioned Dehadray’s lawyer, highlighting the potential repercussions of such accusations on the nation’s highest office. He underscored the seriousness of the allegations, stating that unless Dehadray could substantiate them, the court might issue a restraining order.
Furthermore, the court emphasized the need to refrain from hasty accusations, particularly those targeting the Prime Minister. Justice Singh acknowledged the political nature of the case but stressed the importance of responsible conduct, especially considering Mishra’s standing as a respected member of the bar.
In a separate lawsuit, Mishra has sought redress against Dehadray for making defamatory remarks, including allegations of corruption. The case also involves Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra, with Mishra demanding an apology and compensation, along with the removal of defamatory material from various platforms.
During the proceedings, Mishra’s lawyer, Samudra Sarangi, argued against the allegations, asserting that Mishra had not targeted Prime Minister Modi as claimed by Dehadray. Sarangi highlighted Mishra’s ideological alignment with the BJP and the Prime Minister.
Also read: Deve Gowda Targets Congress Manifesto, Says- Party Knows Very Well That It Will Never Come To Power
In response, Dehadray maintained the validity of his claims, alleging Mishra’s involvement in treasonous activities and indicating his intention to present evidence, including a CBI complaint.
The court, while ensuring the freedom of the press, reiterated its stance against banning media coverage of the case.
In his petition, Mishra detailed his relationship with Dehadray and Moitra, alleging that Dehadray made baseless accusations against him and others following their fallout.
The case is set to continue with further hearings scheduled to examine the evidence presented by both parties.
