The Delhi High Court has ordered controversial Historian Audrey Truschke to take down her defamatory tweets against Indian Historian and Author Vikram Sampath within 48 hours. On Thursday, the Delhi High Court was hearing an application by Sampath seeking to take down tweets against him by Audrey Truschke and others accusing him of alleged plagiarism.
Lawyer Raghav Awasthi arguing on behalf of Vikram Sampath stated that the barrage of online attacks on Vikram Sampath has continued while the news tweets against Sampath also directly attack the authority of the court. The Delhi High Court on February 18, had passed an interim order restraining Audrey Truschke, Jo Chopra and Ananya Chakravarti from publishing defamatory online content against Sampath.
During the hearing, Awasthi pointed out that the letter written by Audrey Truschke, Jo Chopra and Ananya Chakravarti to The Royal Historical Society, London of which Vikram Sampath is the member. The letter was written by the professor trio accusing Vikram Sampath of plagiarism concerning his speech at the India Foundation Journal in 2017. Advocate Jawahar Raja alleged that Vikram’s published speech is, in reality, a (research) paper and that Janaki Bakhale (whom Vikram Sampath has quoted in his article) has also objected the same.
While dismissing the claims that the objections of Bakhale is an independent matter, the Judge stated, “I hold the view that the said documents which advocate Raghav Awasthi has brought on record be allowed to be placed on record as the suit is in early stages.”
BREAKING: “I hold the view that the said documents which advocate @raghav355 for @vikramsampath has brought on record be allowed to be placed on record as the suit is oi early stages,” says Delhi High Court.— LawBeat (@LawBeatInd) February 24, 2022
Further, Awasthi argued before the court that the letter written by Truschke which is submitted to a third person adds that there is a case of ‘potential plagiarism’. Pointing this out, Lawyer Awasthi argued that “From plagiarism, they have now come to potential plagiarism.”
Another aspect she (@AudreyTruschke) adds in her letter(s) is that there is potential plagiarism. “From plagiarism they have now come to potential plagiarism,” *laughs* Awasthi adds@raghav355 #vikramsampath— LawBeat (@LawBeatInd) February 24, 2022
Raghav Awasthi also took a dig at Audrey Truschke’s mention of ‘The Wire’ in her letter while alleging that they have published terrorist Sharjeel Imam as a columnist. While giving its final decision, the judge announced that the court would be ordering Audrey Truschke to take down tweets against Sampath.”
When the opposing lawyer Jawahar Raja objected to the decision stating it is a case of free speech, the court said, “Vikram Sampath has made a prima-facie case! You are not even Dr Audrey’s lawyer! Why do you want to argue this at all? It doesn’t even directly affect you! This puts apprehensions in our minds! You want to sensationalise!”
Court rejects contentions raised by Advocate Raja.— LawBeat (@LawBeatInd) February 24, 2022
“@vikramsampath has made a prime Facie case! You are not even Dr. Audrey’s lawyer! Why do you want to argue this at all? It doesn’t even directly affect you! This puts apprehensions in our mind! You want to sensationalise!”
Closing the matter, The Delhi High Court reiterated its stand that it has already restrained Truschke and others from posting the letter & email or any other defamatory content concerning Vikram Sampath.