Mon Sep 08 17:25:18 UTC 2025: **Summary:**

The Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) leader Medha Patkar regarding a decades-old defamation case against Delhi Lieutenant-Governor V.K. Saxena. Patkar had sought to introduce an additional witness in the case, a request that was denied by both the trial court and the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, stating it was not inclined to interfere. Patkar and Saxena have been in a legal battle since 2000, stemming from allegations of defamation made by Patkar regarding advertisements published by Saxena.

**News Article:**

**Supreme Court Denies Medha Patkar’s Plea in Defamation Case Against Delhi L-G**

**New Delhi, September 8, 2025** – The Supreme Court today declined to entertain a plea by activist Medha Patkar, leader of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), challenging a Delhi High Court order that denied her request to examine an additional witness in a long-standing defamation case against Delhi Lieutenant-Governor V.K. Saxena.

Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma stated the court was not inclined to interfere with the High Court’s decision. Following this, Patkar’s counsel withdrew the petition.

The defamation case dates back to 2000, when Patkar filed suit against Saxena, then head of the Ahmedabad-based NGO Council for Civil Liberties, alleging that advertisements published by him defamed her and the NBA. Saxena subsequently filed two counter-suits against Patkar in 2001.

Patkar’s attempt to introduce an additional witness, Nandita Narain, was initially rejected by the trial court in March, which deemed it a delaying tactic after 24 years of proceedings. The Delhi High Court upheld this dismissal in July, stating insufficient cause was shown for the delay in presenting the witness.

While the Supreme Court previously affirmed Patkar’s conviction in the case on August 11th, it overturned the High Court’s order requiring her to pay ₹1 lakh in compensation and modified her probation order.

The legal battle between Patkar and Saxena continues, highlighting the enduring impact of events from the turn of the millennium.

Read More