Saxena said, in his reply, that the appeal was not maintainable and liable to be dismissed on the “sole ground that it is not signed by the Appellant (Patkar) and is filed only under the signatures of the counsel.” The Delhi L-G also said the appeal was not maintainable as it was filed under “wrong provisions”.

“…the said appeal is arising from the complaint which was filed and the entire trial was conducted under the provisions of CrPC [Code of Criminal Procedure]…hence, the same is not maintainable under section 415(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023…,” he said in his reply.

While sentencing Patkar, Judicial Magistrate (First Class) Raghav Sharma on July 1 ordered a one-month suspension of the sentence under Section 389(3) of the CrPC to allow Patkar to file an appeal against the judgment. Patkar was convicted by the Delhi court on May 24 in the defamation case.

On the other hand, Patkar’s counsel earlier argued there was no proof that the 2000 press note was sent to Saxena by her. Her counsel also argued that the email through which Saxena stated he received the press note was not brought on record.

Less than a month later, Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Singh suspended her sentence, and granted bail to Patkar. ASJ Singh directed her to furnish bail bonds of Rs 25,000, and issued notice to Saxena seeking his reply on September 4.

Saxena, who was then the chief of Ahmedabad-based NGO National Council for Civil Liberties, published an advertisement in 2000 against Patkar’s Narmada Bachao Andolan, which opposed the construction of dams over the Narmada River. Patkar then allegedly issued a ‘press notice’ against Saxena.

A defamation suit was filed against Patkar in an Ahmedabad court in 2001. Two years later, the case was transferred to Delhi on the Supreme Court’s directions.