Delhi High Court rejects defamation case against Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa for statement made while arguing a case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a defamation case against Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa for alleged statement made by him while arguing a case [Pankaj Oswal through his Constituted Attorney Sanjay Wali v Vikas Pahwa]..A division bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Amit Bansal rejected the appeal filed against a single-judge ruling in favour of Pahwa. The Court noted that the statement was made by Pahwa during the judicial proceedings and, therefore, covered under the doctrine of absolute privilege.“Therefore, in the given facts and circumstances, one would have to conclude that, since the alleged defamatory statement was made by the respondent, albeit orally, in the course of judicial proceedings held before the Sessions Court, it would be protected by the doctrine of absolute privilege, unless one were to hold that it had no reference to the subject proceedings,” the Court held..It, therefore, upheld the single-judge’s order rejecting the defamation suit at the threshold.The single-judge had said that the alleged defamatory statement by itself failed to provide a cause of action due to absolute privilege conferred by law on Pahwa..The defamation plea was filed by one Pankaj Oswal against Pahwa. Oswal claimed that Pahwa had told a sessions court that Oswal had used unparliamentary language and abused his own mother during mediation proceedings in a case.The statement made by Pahwa (as claimed by Oswal) was, “Plaintiff has used unparliamentary language and abused his mother during mediation proceedings.”.Oswal said that the statement was defamatory which harmed and lowered his reputation amongst relatives, friends, business circle and society in general.He said that the statement had no relation to the proceedings carried out before the Sessions Judge and that Pahwa had no personal or direct knowledge of what transpired in the mediation proceedings..Meanwhile, Pahwa’s counsel argued that he was conferred with absolute privilege founded on public interest while conducting proceedings in courtThey contended that if a lawyer is denuded of this privilege, the administration of justice would suffer as the lawyer would be ridden with anxiety and fear that utterances made in the court would be subjected to defamation action.It was stated that Senior Advocates do not deal directly with clients but appear on instructions and in this case, Pahwa was briefed by the instructing counsel about the mediation proceedings..After considering the arguments, the High Court concluded that even if the utterances are assumed to be true, it would be protected by the doctrine of absolute privilege.“Therefore, in our view, the learned Single Judge was right in invoking the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the C.P.C. It is well-established, contrary to the submission made by Mr Gupta, that the Court can, sou motu, exercise this power without waiting for a formal application being filed by the defendant,” the Court held..Advocates Kamal M Gupta, Amber Shehbaz Ansari, Aslam Khan and Gorakh Nath Yadav appeared for Pankaj Oswal.Vikas Pahwa was represented by Senior Advocates AS Chandhiok, Arvind Nigam and Sanjiv Kakra along with advocates Bharat Arora, Himanshu Tanwar, Simran, Vidushi Keshan and Akash Madan. .[Read Judgment]