Delhi Court To Hear Satyender Jain's Defamation Complaint Against Karnail Singh, Jurisdiction Upheld

On Saturday, a Delhi court decided that it had the authority to consider the defamation case against BJP politician Karnail Singh that was brought by former Delhi Minister Satyender Jain. After discussing maintainability and jurisdiction, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Paras Dalal verbally declared that the Rouse Avenue Court had the authority to handle the complaint. The complete order will be posted on the court website later this evening, and the subject is now scheduled for arguments on cognisance on May 8.

The complaint is based on claims that on January 19, 2025, Karnail Singh, a BJP candidate from Shakoor Basti, made disparaging remarks about Jain in an interview with a TV channel. According to Jain's plea, which was submitted through Advocate Rajat Bhardwaj, Singh falsely accused him of corruption, claiming that he owned 1,100 acres of property and that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had found 37 kg of gold in Jain's home. Singh allegedly called Jain a "Bhoo Mafia" and threatened to put him in jail once more, accusing him of being dishonest and crooked.

Advocate Vinod Dahiya, the defense's attorney, said that the Special MP/MLA Court lacked jurisdiction because Karnail Singh was not an MLA when the Jain made the complaint.The court had previously deferred its decision about maintainability on April 17. The interpretation of High Court rulings was another topic of discussion. Jain's attorney argued that, using Delhi and Manipur High Court precedents, even a former MLA might bring a complaint before the Special MP/MLA Court.

Questions about whether the complaint may be heard by a special court usually reserved for accused MPs and MLAs were addressed during sessions held on February 6 and March 3. However, ACJM Paras Dalal said that after considering the matter, the court determined that there was enough justification to move forward, even though the defense is still free to raise other arguments.

The court also directed Jain's counsel to file amended memos of the parties involved.

(With ANI Inputs)