New Delhi, May 15 (IANS) A Delhi court Wednesday reserved its order on framing charges against Bharatiya Janata Party leader Vijender Gupta in a defamation complaint filed by Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, who also appeared in the court.
Metropolitan Magistrate Namrita Aggarwal reserved the order for July 1 on whether charges are to be framed against Gupta after hearing the counsels appearing for Diskhit and Gupta.
Dikshit kept standing beside her advocate Mehmood Pracha during the 30-minute-long hearing.
On May 30 last year, the chief minister had appeared in the court for recording her statement after which Gupta was summoned as an accused in the case.
Dikshit has alleged that the BJP leader used “uncivilised language” against her in the run up to the civic body polls last year.
Pracha, appearing for Dikshit, told the court that Gupta’s claim that the statement given by him against Dikshit at a public place was not made by him is completely false.
Ajay Burman, counsel of Gupta, however, argued that Dikshit has not produced any concrete evidence and the material was based on newspaper reports which is inadmissible in the court.
“She had not corroborated any of her allegations made in the complaint and Gupta has been summoned on the basis of news reports which is not a material as it is a hearsay evidence,” he said.
The defamation case was filed against Gupta to harass him as he has been fighting for rights of citizens, Burman claimed.
Dikshit had taken exemption from personal appearance several times on various grounds including her health condition and official commitments.
Her failure from appearing in the court, however, had been objected by the counsel of the BJP leader. According to him, as per law if the complainant in a summons-trial case does not appear in the case on several dates then the court can dismiss the complaint unless their is a valid or plausible reason for non-appearance.
Gupta had also moved the Delhi High Court for quashing the trial court summon against him on the ground that the entire material, supporting Dikshit’s complaint, was based on hearsay.