Chandigarh, Aug 1 —The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by actor-turned-politician Kangana Ranaut seeking to quash a defamation case initiated by a Bathinda-based elderly protester over a controversial tweet posted during the farmers’ agitation.
Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, while hearing the plea, ruled that there was no merit in Ranaut’s petition and refused to set aside the criminal complaint, the summoning order, or subsequent proceedings pending before the Bathinda trial court.
The defamation case stems from a tweet posted by Ranaut—now a BJP Member of Parliament from Mandi—during the 2020-21 farmers’ protests. Retweeting a post by Gautam Yadav that included a photograph of the complainant Mahinder Kaur, Ranaut wrote:
“Ha ha ha she is the same dadi who featured in Time magazine for being the most powerful Indian… And she is available in 100 rupees. Pakistani jurno’s have hijacked international PR for India in an embarrassing way. We need our own people to speak for us internationally.”
Kaur, in her complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bathinda, stated that the tweet had falsely identified her as the woman who participated in the Shaheen Bagh protests and featured in Time magazine. She maintained that she had no affiliation with the Shaheen Bagh movement and had never been featured in the publication.
The complainant, represented by senior advocate G.K. Mann and advocates Aditya Dassaur and Armaan Sandhu, argued that Ranaut’s remarks were defamatory and had damaged her reputation among fellow protestors. “The tweet lowered my standing in the eyes of the community, caused mental distress, and subjected me to public ridicule,” Kaur said, asserting that she came from a farming family and had actively taken part in the farmers’ agitation.
Ranaut had sought to have the proceedings quashed under Sections 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, challenging the defamation charges under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. She also contested the summoning order issued by the trial court.
However, the High Court found the arguments unconvincing. The Bench concluded that the tweet in question warranted legal scrutiny and refused to interfere with the trial process at this stage.
