Supreme Court Comments on Kangana Ranaut’s ‘Spiced-Up’ Tweet as Petition Withdrawn in Farmers’ Protest Defamation Case
The bench observed that the petition for quashing the defamation complaint cannot be decided by examining the tweet itself.
“This was not a simple retweet; you added your own spice to it,” the Supreme Court remarked on Friday to actress and BJP MP Kangana Ranaut, whose petition seeking to quash a defamation complaint related to her tweet during the 2020-21 farmers’ protests was withdrawn.
During the hearing, a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta expressed reluctance to entertain the petition, stating that the content of the tweet or retweet could not be considered while deciding whether to quash the case.
Ranaut’s lawyer informed the court that the actress had merely retweeted a post.
He said, “She retweeted the original tweet. Several others had also retweeted it.”
Justice Mehta responded, “What would you say about the observations on page 35? This is not an ordinary retweet, as you claim. You added something—you spiced up what was already there.”
When the lawyer referred to the retweet, the bench remarked, “So what allegation arises from that? That is a matter for trial.”
The lawyer argued that a petition for quashing had been filed and that Ranaut had offered an explanation.
Justice Mehta replied, “That explanation can be presented before the lower court, not in quashing proceedings.”
The lawyer further stated, “Given the situation, I am unable to travel to Punjab today.”
The bench responded, “You may seek exemption from appearance.”
The lawyer contended that the lower court had issued a summons without considering Ranaut’s explanation.
The bench observed, “The complainant must have chosen not to file it. That could be a valid defense for you.”
It added, “Do not ask us to comment on what is written on page 35—it may adversely affect your case. We are not here to pass judgment. You may have a valid defense, but there are other ways to proceed.”
Justice Nath then asked the lawyer if the petitioner wished to withdraw the plea.
The lawyer replied, “I will withdraw,” and the bench permitted it.
Ranaut had approached the top court challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s refusal to quash the complaint against her.
The actress-turned-politician had challenged the defamation case arising from her retweet, which included her own remarks about a female protester during the farmers’ agitation against the now-repealed farm laws.
The complainant, 73-year-old Mahinder Kaur from Bahadurgarh Jandian village in Bathinda district, had filed the complaint in January 2021 at a local court in Bathinda.
The complaint alleged that the actress made “false allegations and defamatory comments” against her through the retweet, suggesting she was the same “grandmother” involved in the Shaheen Bagh protests.
In its order dated August 1, the High Court rejected Ranaut’s plea, stating, “Specific allegations have been made against the petitioner, who is a public figure, that the false and defamatory allegations made in the retweet harmed the reputation of the respondent and diminished her image in the eyes of others. Therefore, the complaint cannot be considered malicious.”
Kaur stated that she had been part of protests against the repealed farm laws since their inception in 2020-21.
Despite her age, she had traveled to Delhi to participate in demonstrations alongside other protesters.
She also clarified that she had no association with the woman from Shaheen Bagh featured in TIME magazine, with whom she was compared in the tweet.
It was alleged that Ranaut’s actions—making false allegations and offensive remarks against the complainant—had harmed her dignity and reputation on social media.
Ranaut’s lawyer had argued before the High Court that the summons issued by the Bathinda court violated the Code of Criminal Procedure and should not be upheld.
After initial evidence was recorded, the magistrate had sought a report from the director of Twitter Communications India Private Limited (TCIPL), contending that the summons could not have been served since the report was never received.
It was further argued that Ranaut had no intent to damage the complainant’s reputation.
Continuing the achievement of the journey of effectiveness and credibility of more than 10 years in the career of journalism, as a woman journalist, I am Serving as the founder, promoter and editor of DiaryTimes with the trust and support of all. My credible coverage may not have given a big shape to the numbers, but my journey presents articles that make you aware of the exact and meaningful situations of Himachal’s politics, ground issues related to the public, business, tourism and the difficult geographical conditions of the state and financial awareness. DiaryTimes, full of the experience of my precise editorial expertise, is awakening the flame of credible journalism among all of you, so that the eternal flame of meaningful change can be lit in the life of the people of the state and the atrocities being committed against the people can be brought to the fore, I am motivated for that. If even a small change comes with the power of my journalism and the whole world becomes a witness to that issues, then I will consider myself fortunate.
