New Delhi [India], March 18 : Delhi's Saket court on Tuesday rejected the plea moved by social activist Medha Patkar seeking permission to examine Nandita Narrain as an additional witness in a defamation case against LG V K Saxena.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Raghav Sharma on Tuesday rejected the plea making certain observations.
While rejecting the plea, the court said, "Allowing such applications without proper justification would set a dangerous precedence.
"If parties are permitted to introduce new businesses arbitrarily and at such a late stage, trial courts would become never-ending, as litigants could continuously bring for new witnesses whenever it suits them, thereby prolonging proceedings indefinitely," the court said in the order passed on March 18.
The court further said that the judicial process cannot be held hostage to such tactics, especially in a case that has already been pending for two decades.
The plea was strongly opposed by the counsel for LG Saxena, who said that it was aimed at delaying the trial. This case has been pending since 2000.
Patkar filed a defamation case against incumbent LG VK Saxena in 2000.
Medha Patkar moved an application through advocate Sridevi Pannikar and sought to examine one more witness, namely Nandita Narrain in support of her allegations of defamation against accused VK Saxena.
It was stated that Nandita Narrain is a relevant witness in the present case.
It was also stated that the complainant, Medha Patkar, has examined three witnesses so far and on 29.11.2024, the court granted her time to examine whether there is a requirement to examine any other witness.
On the other hand, advocate Rajinder Kumar, counsel for LG Saxena, filed a reply and opposed the plea.
It was contested that the application has been at a belated stage to further delay the trial, which has been pending for the last 24 years.
Saxena also argued that this case has been pending since December 2000. Medha Patkar has never mentioned Nadita Narrain as a witness relevant to the case until now.
It was also argued that the last opportunity has already been granted to the complainant to lead evidence. Now, to cause an inordinate and unjust delay, this application has been filed.
While opposing the plea, it is stated that grave prejudice shall be caused if the complainant is allowed to introduce new witnesses and further prolong the trial even after almost 25 years making the proceedings never-ending.
The court convicted Patkar last year in the defamation case filed by V K Saxena against her. Her appeal against the conviction and sentence is pending before the court.