Delhi Court: Notice to Saurabh Bharadwaj in Defamation Case

• The Rouse Avenue Court issued a pre-cognizance notice to AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj and two AAP MLAs regarding a criminal defamation complaint by Delhi Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa.
• The complaint alleges "Gullak Chori," "Chawal Chori," and an Rs 11,000 crore scam, with Sirsa claiming severe reputational damage, especially within the Sikh community.
• This notice, issued on October 29, 2026, allows the proposed accused to respond before the court decides whether to take formal cognizance of the case.
• The court's action aligns with Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which mandates an opportunity for the accused to be heard at the pre-cognizance stage.
• The matter is scheduled for further hearing on November 18, to consider responses and determine if a defamation case is made out.

The court's decision to issue a notice at the pre-cognizance stage is directly aligned with the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The Rouse Avenue Court, through its Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, has issued a notice to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Saurabh Bharadwaj and two other AAP MLAs, Sanjeev Jha and Kuldeep Kumar, in connection with a criminal defamation complaint. This action, taken on October 29, 2026, precedes the court's decision on whether to formally take cognizance of the case. The notice stems from a complaint filed by Delhi Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, alleging that certain remarks made against him constituted criminal defamation.

This procedural step allows the proposed accused individuals an opportunity to present their response to the complaint before the court determines if a prima facie case of criminal defamation exists. It is crucial to note that this notice does not constitute a summons for Bharadwaj or the other MLAs as accused persons. The court's decision to issue this notice followed the recording of statements from Sirsa himself, along with three witnesses: Abhisek Sharma, Gurdev Singh, and Gurjeet Singh. Advocate Yogender Handoo represented Sirsa during the recording of his statement.

Manjinder Singh Sirsa's complaint centers on allegations of "Gullak Chori" amounting to Rs 400–450 crore, "Chawal Chori" totaling Rs 600 crore monthly, and an overarching scam valued at Rs 11,000 crore. These accusations, Sirsa stated, were initially made against him during a press conference. He further informed the court that Saurabh Bharadwaj had previously used the term "Gullak Chor" against him on multiple occasions. Hours after Sirsa's statement to the ACJM, Bharadwaj reiterated his "rice scam" allegation on X, dismissing the criminal defamation case as "false & frivolous."

Sirsa emphasized the profound impact of these allegations, particularly the "Gullak Chori remark Delhi," on his standing within the Sikh community. He testified that "Gullak Chori" is considered one of the most severe sins in Sikhism, describing it as the "worst word that can be attributed to a Sikh." The Delhi Minister recounted that the widespread dissemination of these claims in media and social media led to people closely associated with him questioning his integrity and even beginning to avoid him. Sirsa asserted that his reputation, previously impeccable, had been "immensely beyond repair," especially among those connected to Sikhism and Gurudwara activities. Prior to the court proceedings, Sirsa had also served a legal notice to Bharadwaj and Sanjeev Jha, demanding a public retraction of the allegations and an apology for the harm caused to his reputation.

The court's decision to issue a notice at the pre-cognizance stage is directly aligned with the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Specifically, the proviso to Section 223(1) of this new legislation stipulates a critical procedural requirement: a Magistrate cannot take cognizance of an offense based on a complaint without first affording the accused an opportunity to be heard. This legal framework ensures that individuals facing such complaints have a chance to respond before formal proceedings commence.

This particular instance of the Delhi Court notice Saurabh Bharadwaj defamation complaint underscores the importance of this pre-cognizance stage. The Rouse Avenue Court defamation proceedings will only move forward to determine if a case of criminal defamation is established after considering any response filed by the proposed accused. The matter is currently scheduled for further hearing on November 18, at which point the court will assess the submitted responses and decide on the next steps in the Manjinder Singh Sirsa criminal defamation complaint against the AAP MLAs.

Lawyers handling criminal defamation cases in India should note the procedural requirement under Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which mandates giving the accused an opportunity to respond before a court takes cognizance. This development highlights a critical pre-cognizance stage for defense strategy, allowing for early engagement and response to complaints.

Source: Original reporting via legal news outlet