Bailable Warrants Issued Against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in 2018 Defamation Case
A Delhi court has issued bailable warrants against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in a 2018 defamation case after summons could not be served.
A Delhi court has issued bailable warrants against popular YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in connection with a defamation case dating back to 2018. The court's decision follows a report from a process server stating that Rathee's residence was found locked during an attempt to deliver the legal summons.
The Trigger for the Court's Action
The legal escalation occurred after the court took note of the failed attempt to serve the summons. This development comes shortly after the court had issued fresh summons to Rathee's address in Gurugram. The move was prompted by a plea from the complainant, Vikas Sankrityayan (also known as Vikas Pandey), who urged the court to expedite the service of the legal process.
Counsel for the complainant highlighted that efforts to serve the summons had been unsuccessful for several years, primarily because Rathee resides outside of India. The court records indicate that Rathee was first summoned in this matter as far back as July 2019.
Facilitating the Process
In an effort to ensure the summons reached the YouTuber, the court had previously granted permission for Vikas Pandey to personally accompany the process server to assist in the execution of the summons.
The Roots of the Legal Battle
The defamation proceedings stem from a video uploaded by Dhruv Rathee in May 2018. In the video, Rathee allegedly claimed that the Information Technology (IT) cell of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had attempted to offer a bribe to Vikas Pandey to defame him.
The controversy expanded when the video, shared on Rathee's social media handle, was retweeted by Arvind Kejriwal, who was serving as the Chief Minister of Delhi at the time. Consequently, Pandey initiated defamation proceedings against both the YouTuber and the former Chief Minister over the allegations and their subsequent circulation.
What Happens Next?
The case, which has remained pending for several years, has now seen a significant shift with the issuance of bailable warrants. The court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 31.