Delhi court issues fresh bailable warrants against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in 2018 defamation case

A Delhi court on Saturday issued fresh bailable warrants against YouTuber and social media influencer Dhruv Rathee in an eight-year-old criminal defamation case after noting that the earlier warrants were issued at a wrong address in Austria instead of his Gurugram residence.

Judicial magistrate first class Rahul Jain of the Saket courts issued fresh warrants after the execution of the previous warrants proved unsuccessful.

During the proceedings, the complainant’s counsel informed the court that Rathee had already left India and was residing overseas. The court has now listed the matter for further hearing on November 23.

What is the case?

The criminal defamation complaint was filed by Vikas Sanskrityayan over a May 2018 video titled “BJP IT Cell Part II”, which Rathee produced and published on his YouTube channel.

In the video, Rathee had alleged that members of the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) IT Cell had attempted to bribe Sanskrityayan to defame him. Sanskrityayan subsequently approached the court, claiming that the allegations were false, malicious and deliberately intended to damage his reputation.

The video had gained widespread attention in 2018 after it was shared on social media by former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal.

Sanskrityayan had initiated defamation proceedings against both Rathee and Kejriwal. Kejriwal subsequently admitted before the court that sharing the video was a mistake, leading to separate proceedings against him. However, the original complaint against Rathee, as the creator and publisher of the video, continued before the Saket court.

The case has witnessed repeated attempts to serve summons on Rathee, who has largely been residing overseas. The court had initially issued notices as far back as July 23, 2019, but the proceedings remained pending amid difficulties in ensuring his appearance.

At the previous hearing on October 12, the court had issued fresh summons after an urgent application by Sanskrityayan seeking expedited proceedings.

The complainant's counsel, advocate Samaksh Sharma, had informed the court that Rathee, who ordinarily resides in Germany, was then in India to attend a Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protest. The counsel provided a Sector 56 address in Haryana's Gurugram, where Rathee was believed to be staying, and sought steps to ensure service of the summons.