Delhi LG Vinai Saxena calls for maximum punishment for Medha Patkar to 'set example'

On May 24, social activist Medha Patkar was found guilty in a defamation case filed by Delhi Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena. The Delhi's Saket court concluded the arguments of both parties on Thursday, days after convicting Patkar.

Court proceedings and arguments

During Thursday's proceedings, Metropolitan Magistrate Raghav Sharma requested a victim impact report (VIR) from the Delhi Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to determine the extent of damage suffered by Saxena. The next hearing is scheduled for June 7.

Saxena’s lawyer argued for the maximum punishment—a two-year jail term, a fine, or both—stating that Patkar's case should set an example. The lawyer highlighted Patkar's past offense in 2006 as evidence of her repeated defiance of the law and claimed that the circumstances against her are aggravating.

ALSO READ: Cyclone Remal devastates Mizoram: 27 dead, landslides ravage Northeastern States

Defense and mitigating factors

Patkar's lawyer countered, stating there are no aggravating circumstances and that she is not a repeat offender. He emphasized her age (70 years old) and her health issues as mitigating factors. Additionally, he noted her significant contributions, including 28 national awards and five international awards, such as the Right Livelihood Award, which is considered an alternative to the Nobel Prize. 

The legal conflict between Patkar and Saxena dates back to 2000, when Patkar accused Saxena of publishing defamatory advertisements against her and the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA). At that time, Saxena led the Council for Civil Liberties, an NGO based in Ahmedabad.

ALSO READ: Delhi's power demand hits record high of 8,300 MW amid intense heatwave

The court's decision to seek a victim impact report indicates that further deliberations will focus on the impact of Patkar's actions on Saxena. The outcome of the hearing on June 7 will determine the final sentence for Patkar, considering both the aggravating and mitigating factors presented by the respective counsels.