Dhruv Rathee defamation case: Delhi court issues bailable warrants, hearing on October 31

A Delhi court on Saturday issued bailable warrants against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in a defamation case dating back to 2018 over a video titled ‘BJP IT Cell Part II’ published on his YouTube channel.

Judicial Magistrate First Class (South East) Rahul Jain issued the fresh warrants after the court was informed that Rathee’s residence was found locked when an attempt was made to serve an earlier summons, Bar and Bench reported.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for October 31. A detailed order on the latest development is awaited.

Why the defamation case was filed

The case stems from a complaint filed by Vikas Sanskrityayan, who alleged that Rathee had published and circulated a video containing defamatory statements and false allegations against him.

According to the complaint, the video made several claims about Sanskrityayan that he considers untrue and damaging to his reputation.

The legal proceedings began in 2018, and Rathee was initially summoned by the court in 2019, according to PTI.

Fresh summons issued after request to advance hearing

Earlier this week, the court issued fresh summons to Rathee after Sanskrityayan sought to advance the hearing, which had previously been scheduled for November 20.

Advocate Samaksh Sharma, appearing for the complainant, told the court that Rathee ordinarily resides in Austria and had travelled to India to participate in protests organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).

The application seeking an earlier hearing stated that Rathee, who lives in Germany, was in India amid protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

Following the application, the court advanced the matter and issued fresh summons on October 12, directing that they be served on Rathee at his residence in Gurugram, Haryana.

Court awaits further proceedings

The latest bailable warrants were issued after the court was informed that the earlier summons could not be served because Rathee’s house was locked when officials attempted delivery.

The court will take up the matter again on October 31. The proceedings relate to the allegations made in the complaint, and the issuance of warrants does not establish that the alleged defamatory statements were made or that Rathee is guilty.