AAP Moves Court to Defend MPs, MLAs After Manjhi’s Sweeping Corruption Remark

The article reports a legal notice filed by Somnath Bharti in response to Jitan Ram Manjhi's remark alleging corruption among MPs and MLAs. It outlines demanded withdrawals, apologies, and potential civil and criminal actions, framing the issue around democratic credibility and legal accountability.

A controversial statement by Union Minister Jitan Ram Manjhi has now drawn a legal challenge. Senior Aam Aadmi Party leader and former minister Somnath Bharti has sent a legal notice to Manjhi. The notice states that the remark has damaged the credibility of Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assemblies. Bharti has demanded a public apology and withdrawal of the statement within seven days.

The controversy began when Jitan Ram Manjhi said at a public event that “every MP and every MLA takes commission.” This comment appears to directly question the integrity of the entire class of MPs and MLAs. The Aam Aadmi Party has said that such words strike at the credibility of democratic institutions. The party has also described the remark as an indirect attack on the mandate given by voters.

Jitan Ram Manjhi’s remark and Aam Aadmi Party’s objection

The Aam Aadmi Party has called the comment an assault on democracy and the dignity of elected representatives. According to the party, branding representatives chosen by crores of voters as corrupt without evidence is a serious matter. Such a stance, instead of strengthening the fight against corruption, casts suspicion on the entire system. The party said the allegation appears to be driven by rhetorical provocation rather than facts.

In the legal notice, Somnath Bharti has argued that declaring an identifiable group criminal without verification amounts to defamation. In the eyes of the law, every MP and every MLA constitutes a clearly identifiable class. Therefore, collectively accusing all of them of taking commissions also harms individual reputations. Bharti maintains that this is not merely a political statement but a legal issue as well.

Legal notice and grounds for defamation over Manjhi’s statement

The notice clearly states that freedom of expression is not an unlimited right. Any individual, especially someone holding a constitutional position, is expected to choose words responsibly. Making sweeping allegations without fact-based evidence is considered against both the law and democratic propriety. For this reason, the statement is being challenged at both criminal and civil levels.

Somnath Bharti has said that such remarks do not eliminate corruption but make it seem normal. When it is said that everyone is involved in theft or commissions, honest representatives become invisible. This can deepen the public perception that reforming the system is impossible. According to Bharti, this message weakens democratic trust.

Demand for apology and the next course of action

As per the legal notice, Jitan Ram Manjhi has been given a deadline of seven days. During this period, he is expected to withdraw the statement unconditionally from the same public platform or medium. A public apology has also been demanded, along with a written assurance that such language will not be used in the future. Failure to comply will invite criminal and civil proceedings.

The actions sought in the notice are summarised as follows:

• Withdrawal of statement: Retract the remark from the same public platform or medium

• Public apology: Offer an unconditional apology to the entire MP–MLA community

• Written assurance: Commit in writing to refrain from using such language in the future

• Legal action: Criminal and civil cases, including a demand for heavy damages, if compliance is not met

  The Aam Aadmi Party has also linked the controversy to the BJP leadership. The party has questioned whether the central government will allow its minister to tarnish the image of Parliament and state legislatures. AAP has argued that such statements may also be used to divert attention from issues like inflation and unemployment. The party reiterated that accountability is necessary, but false and insulting allegations are unacceptable.

  The entire episode highlights the sharp difference between platform rhetoric and legal accountability. On one hand, there is an unsubstantiated comment targeting an entire class. On the other, there is Somnath Bharti’s approach of seeking accountability through constitutional means. This underlines the message that in a democratic framework, every word carries legal and social weight.