Delhi HC Restrains Several Historians From Publishing Defamatory Content Against Historian Vikram Sampath

The Delhi High Court, in an interim order on Friday, restrained several historians from publishing defamatory content, both online and offline, against Dr Vikram Sampath.

Historian Vikram Sampath | (File Photo/ Getty Images)

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court, in an interim order on Friday, restrained several historians from publishing defamatory content, both online and offline, against Dr Vikram Sampath, news agency ANI reported.

Dr Vikram Sampath, the author of a two-volume biography of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, had filed a suit against several historians over allegations of plagiarism against him with respect to his two-volume biography of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, and some alleged defamatory tweets against him. The Delhi High Court was hearing this suit filed by him, according to ANI.

Delhi High Court in an interim order restrains several historians from publishing any defamatory content (online and offline) against Dr Vikram Sampath, author of a two-volume biography of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar pic.twitter.com/9AhkROy5aL

— ANI (@ANI) February 18, 2022

It has been reported that Audrey Truschke is one of the historians restrained from publishing defamatory material against Sampath, till April 1 on Twitter, as well as other online and offline platforms.

In a letter dated February 11, and addressed to the Royal Historical Society in London, the defendants had reportedly raised serious allegations of plagiarism against Sampath. It was reported that Justice Amit Bansal, passing an ad interim order, restrained the defendants from publishing that letter till the next date of hearing.

Sampath had reportedly filed the suit against Audrey Truschke and other persons over the letter sent by them to the Royal Historical Society. 

Sampath's suit stated that Historian Audrey Truschke and other persons, namely Ananya Chakravarti and Rohit Chopra, wrote the letter dated February 11 to the Royal Historical Society in London.

A perusal of the letter will show that the crux of the allegation made against Sampath is that in an essay written for the Journal, he had plagiarised from an essay written by a person named Vinayak Chaturvedi, the suit stated reportedly. 

The suit also referred to some defamatory tweets made by Abhishek Baxi and Ashok Swain. The suit reportedly alleged that the tweets were posted with a mala fide intent to hit Sampath's professional reputation, not only at the national level, but also across the whole world.

It was also reported that Advocate Raghav Awasthi appearing for Sampath submitted during the course of the hearing on Friday that the latter had adequately cited and had given due credits to the author. Advocate Awasthi reportedly submitted that therefore, Sampath cannot be held liable for plagiarism.

It was reported that Advocate Awasthi argued that Dr Jhanki Bhakhle had even written a review of Sampath's book in question and had made no grievance of plagiarism. Awasthi reportedly argued that the publication of the said letter at various social media platforms including Twitter was causing harm to Sampath's reputation.

It has been reported that the Delhi High Court issued summons in the suit, and posted the matter for further hearing on April 1. 

The suit reportedly sought decree of permanent injunction against the aforementioned descendants to cease the publication of the letter or any other defamatory material, and also sought damage of Rs two crores from the defendants.