Get Daily Dose of Legal Updates like this
We will send you latest legal updates via emails. Isn't that cool?
Subscribe Free!

Actually we will not spam you and keep your personal data secure

Todays Date
21 November 2017

Ram Jethmalani Quits as an Acting Counsel in the Defamation Case against the Delhi CM

Senior Supreme Court lawyer, Mr. Ram Jethmalani has refused to act as a counsel on behalf of the Delhi Chief Minister, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, in the defamation case filed against him.

Mr. Jethmalani has reportedly asked the CM to settle his legal fees  of Rs 2 crores and relieve him of his duties as an acting Counsel in the latter’s case.

The Senior Counsel was representing Mr. Kejriwal in the civil and criminal defamation case, filed against him and five other members of the Aam Admi Party, by the Union Finance Minister, Mr. Arun Jaitley after he was accused by the aforementioned people, of corruption during his term as head of the Delhi & District Cricket Association (DDCA).

Mr. Jaitley, who had already filed the civil defamation suit claiming Rs 10 crore damages from Kejriwal and five other AAP leaders, had filed another defamation suit of Rs 10 crore against the Chief Minister alone, for the permission to use such derogatory remarks.

This step was taken after reports came stating that during the Court Proceedings, Mr. Kejriwal blatantly denied giving instructions for the use of the derogatory remarks for the Petitioner.

In his affidavit, Kejriwal said it was “inconceivable that he would even think of instructing the senior counsel to use such objectionable words.” The CM denied the charge of Jaitley that the questions with derogatory remarks were “clearly designed to insult and/or annoy” him.

In the affidavit filed before Justice Manmohan it was claimed. “That with due respect it is submitted that neither the answering defendant (Kejriwal) nor the counsel briefing the senior counsel (Jethmalani) gave instructions to the senior counsel to use the objectionable words on May 17, 2017,”

Mr. Jethmalani, however claimed that the Defendent had made use of a much more derogatory language while referring to the Finance Minister.

Loading...

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Read in Your Language

Post by Category