On the 1st of July, two Supreme Court Judges made certain remarks, blaming ex-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma’s “loose tongue” for the beheading of Kanhaiya Lal by Islamic fanatics. The observations, that did not make it to the written order, drew widespread condemnation from all quarters. On social media particularly, the criticism minced no words. One such individual who criticised the observations by the SC Judges was Vikrant Kumar. He has now tweeted that he has got a notice from Twitter, saying Congress had filed a lawsuit and got an injunction from the court, for a post where he criticised the oral observations against Nupur Sharma.
I woke up to a Twitter notice that the Congress party had filed a lawsuit to remove my post criticizing SC Judges on their oral observations on Nupur Sharma.
— Vikrant ~ विक्रांत (@vikrantkumar) July 15, 2022
They talk about Freedom of Speech.
The post that Congress approached the court against, and Twitter got intimated to pull down, was one where Vikrant had pointed out that Taliban had appreciated the oral observations by Judges Surya Kant and Pardiwala, and that these judges should introspect instead of gagging criticism.
Taliban is happy with #SuryaKant and #Pardiwala on their comment on Nupur Sharma. What more can be damning on them?
— Vikrant ~ विक्रांत (@vikrantkumar) July 3, 2022
They should look within instead of gagging valid criticism.
Vikrant Kumar got an email from Twitter that informed him about the injunction against his tweet. In the email, Twitter said that it had not taken action against the tweet for now, however, they may have to at a later date if they are asked to by the courts.
The email said that the legal notice has claimed that Vikrant’s tweet is against Indian laws.
In the email itself, that OpIndia has perused, the injunction copy was attached.
What did the court order and the legal notice to Twitter say
On the 7th of July, Congress post holder Dipali Sikand approached the sessions court in Bangalore to get an injunction against commentary that was being made about a picture, where several individuals were seen dining at a club owned by Sikand.
The MindScapes Club, owned by Sikand, had posted a picture where Sikand was seen dining with Finance Minister – Tamil Nadu, P. Thiagarajan, NDTV’s Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, CPIM’s Brinda Karat and Prakash Karat, The Hindu’s N. Ram and his wife.
A Chef's Table session with Finance Minister – Tamil Nadu, Mr. P. Thiagarajan, Dr. Prannoy Roy and Mrs. Radhika Roy, Mrs. Brinda Karat and Mr. Prakash Karat, Mrs. and Mr. N. Ram and Dipali Sikand. #ExperienceMindEscapes #ChefsTable #Nilgiris #GreatMindsMeet pic.twitter.com/pPrBGZh4Ij
— Mindescapes (@MindEscapesClub) July 3, 2022
Since this was just after the Supreme Court observations, rumours started floating that in this picture, Judge Surya Kant and Pardiwala were also present, therefore, alluding to a certain communist bias.
The injunction sought was against certain Twitter handles that were supposedly posting “defamatory” content against Dipali Sikand and her “guests who dined at the MindScapes Club”. The suit sought an injunction restraining people from writing about the picture, Dipali Sikand or her guests (N Ram et al). The suit also sought to force people to take down their posts about this picture.
The Sessions Court had passed an ex-parte injunction forcing the netizens mentioned by Sikand to not post anything about the picture or the people present at that luncheon and also, asked Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp etc to pull down the posts mentioned in the suit.
In the suit, Dipali Sikand had mentioned that there were several people who were “giving this a political colour” by alleging that Justices Surya Kant and Pardiwala were a part of the luncheon when they were not. This had defamed the guests who were present at the luncheon and given it a political colour. Therefore, she had asked the court to restrain not just the Twitter handles mentioned, but also the “unknown entities” who were tweeting about this. She had contended that the tweets were being posted to lower the reputation of the Judges involved as well.
Who is Dipali Sikand
Dipali Sikand is an entrepreneur, but more important, she is a post holder of the Congress party.
On the 2nd of January 2021, Rajeev Gowda, Congress leader and spokesperson had posted a tweet congratulating Dipali Sikand for being appointed as a national coordinator of Congress.
Congratulations & welcome on board our national team @AmitSihag_INC, Dipali Sikand, @AkashSatyawali, & @gauravkapoorvns
— Rajeev Gowda (@rajeevgowda) February 2, 2021
All the best! pic.twitter.com/fVQ1q74gCh
She is also the founder of Founder, LesConcierges, ClubConcierge, MindEscapes.
Why did the tweet by Vikrant Kumar, criticising the Judges, make it to the list by Dipali Sikand
The injunction, a copy of which Vikrant Kumar got, was about the picture of Dipali Sikand, other communist leaders, NDTV journalists and The Hindu’s N Ram, however, Vikrant’s tweet was specifically criticising the oral observations by Justice Pardiwala and Surya Kant. So how did Vikrant’s tweet make it to the list of tweet URLs that Dipali Sikand, Congress worker, provided to the court for an injunction?
It is pertinent to note that N Ram, who had cropped Rafale papers and ran the fake news for weeks, had outraged about the picture and claims that the two judges were present at the lunch.
How idiotic! The calibre of your disinformation is pathetic, beneath contempt. pic.twitter.com/v6blzH0Cru
— N. Ram (@nramind) July 5, 2022
It is also pertinent to keep in mind that the entire Congress ecosystem had condemned the criticism of the Judges for their oral remarks.
In the suit by Sikand, she had mentioned that the comments on the picture also defamed the two judges – Surya Kant and Pardiwala.
Since Congress was enthusiastic about the shameful oral observations against Nupur Sharma, while it is possible that Vikrant’s tweet was added by mistake, it seems more likely that this was Congress’ way to shut down criticism of not just the lavish lifestyle led by avowed Communists and the nexus between Media and the Communist party functionaries as evident in the picture, but also criticism of Judges Surya Kant and Pardiwala.
