Saket Court flags defective affidavit by BJP's Suresh Nakhua in suit against Dhruv Rathee

The Saket District Court recently directed Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Suresh Nakhua to file fresh affidavit in the defamation suit filed by him against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee [Suresh Karamshi Nakhua vs. Dhruv Rathee].

Nakhua had moved the Court against Rathee alleging defamation due to the video uploaded by Rathee on his YouTube channel on July 7.

The video was titled “My Reply to Godi Youtubers | Elvish Yadav | Dhruv Rathee” on his YouTube channel on July 7.

District Judge Gunjan Gupta observed that Nakhua’s affidavit annexed with his petition was defective and directed him to file it afresh.

The judge said that even though the defect in the affidavit is curable, Nakhua had failed to cure the same and filed the suit with defective affidavit.

Nakhua, the spokesperson for Mumbai unit of the BJP, moved the Court alleging that Rathee in his video had referred to him as being part of “violent and abusive trolls”.

As per his suit, the allegations are without any “rhyme or reason” and have the tendency to bring down his reputation.

“That the Defendant No.1 [Dhruv Rathee], who in a highly provocative and incendiary video that spread like wildfire across digital platforms, made bold and unsubstantiated claims against the Plaintiff. The insidious intent behind this video lies in its unfounded insinuation that the Plaintiff is somehow linked to violent and abusive troll activities,” the suit argued. 

Nakhua claimed in his plea that because of the allegations made by Rathee, he (Nakhua) has faced widespread condemnation and ridicule.

“That through this cunningly crafted video, a deliberate campaign to besmirch the Plaintiff's integrity and reputation is apparent, as baseless accusations and malicious connections are artfully insinuated. The primary creator of this video that is Plaintiff seek not only to cast doubt on the Plaintiff's character but also to tarnish his hard-earned standing in society, has planted seeds of suspicion and mistrust that can have far-reaching consequences. The repercussions of such false allegations are manifold, extending well beyond the realm of the video itself to irrevocably impact both the personal and professional domains of the Plaintiff, leaving scars that may never fully heal.”

When the matter was taken up on September 20, Senior Advocate Satvik Varma and Advocate Nakul Gandhi appeared for Rathee and argued that the affidavit filed by Nakhua with his petition was defective since it was not properly sworn and verified. 

It was pointed out that Nakhua claimed to be a resident of Mumbai in his affidavit, but his affidavit had been notarized in Delhi.

Subsequently, despite Nakhua’s admission that his affidavit was defective, he filed an amended petition but with the same defective affidavit.

Advocate Raghav Awasthi, appearing for Nakhua, submitted that the issue of defective affidavit was curable and sought permission to submit an amended plaint with a fresh affidavit. 

He further submitted that Nakhua has an office in Gurgaon but the court rejected this argument and directed him to file fresh affidavit.

The Court will hear the matter next on November 14.

Nakhua was represented by Advocate Raghav Awasthi.

Rathee was represented by Senior Advocate Satvik Varma, with Advocates Nakul Gandhi, Mujeeb and Shantanu.