Delhi court grants bail to wrestler Bajrang Punia in criminal defamation case

New Delhi [India], November 9 (ANI): Delhi's Patiala House Court on Thursday granted bail to Olympian wrestler Bajrang Punia in a criminal defamation case.
In August, the court issued summons to Punia in the criminal defamation case filed by wrestling coach Naresh Dahiya.
The Metropolitan Magistrate Yashdeep Chahal granted bail to Punia after his physical appearance.
Advocate Rajesh Kumar Rexwal, counsel for the complainant Dahiya, said that the matter has been listed for March 5, 2024.
Dahiya, through a criminal defamation complaint, alleged that during the protest at Jantar Mantar on May 10, 2023, Bajrang Punia made defamatory remarks against him in a press conference.
Punia allegedly stated that Dahiya had no credibility to oppose the protest as he was himself facing a rape case.
But during the recording of his statement, Dahiya categorically deposed that he was acquitted in the said rape case in 2019 itself and it was well known to the accused as well.
Metropolitan Magistrate Yashdeep Chahal, while issuing summons to Bajrang Punia, said that, on consideration of the complaint, supporting documents and presummoning evidence, "I am of the prima facie view that all the ingredients of defamation are made out."
He further said that it appears that the statement made in the press conference was a result of malicious intent and was not made in good faith. In view of the same, let the accused, namely, Bajrang Punia, be summoned for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 499 read with Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.

However, the Court clarified that at the stage of summons, it is fairly settled that the Court is not required to go into a comparative analysis of the possible defence that may be taken by the accused.
Advocates Sudhir Nagar, Ashish Tanwar, Rajesh Rexwal and Ravinder Singh appeared for complainant Naresh Dahiya, who had submitted that the fact of acquittal was well known and a malicious attack was made by the accused to tarnish the reputation as well as credibility of the complainant for the sole reason of dissuading him from supporting the WFI President in the protest. (ANI)