The Delhi High Court Tuesday quashed criminal defamation proceedings against former Biju Janata Dal Lok Sabha MP and senior advocate Pinaki Misra, ruling that there was insufficient material to sustain the case.The order, made public on Wednesday, was passed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who noted that continuing the criminal proceedings “would not advance the cause of justice and would instead subject (Misra) to the rigours of a criminal trial in the absence of sufficient foundational material”.The case arose from a complaint filed by advocate Siddhartha Singh, who had accused Misra of professional misconduct before the Bar Council of Delhi in August 2018, alleging that Misra took contradictory positions on e-waste rules — first before a parliamentary committee, and later, while representing power distribution companies at the National Green Tribunal. Misra denied the allegations and, in response, called Singh a “crook” and “blackmailer”.Singh subsequently filed two criminal complaints in 2019 before a magistrate court in Patiala House, seeking defamation proceedings against Misra over the remarks. The magistrate court summoned Misra to stand trial in both cases on April 20, 2019.Justice Sharma noted that there is “no material on record, in the form of statement of any other person or otherwise, to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had the effect of lowering” Singh’s reputation. The court further stated that during the pre-summoning evidence stage, Singh had examined only himself as a witness, and that a bare assertion of reputational harm did not meet the legal threshold required to initiate criminal defamation proceedings.Singh’s case relied on an online report by Dailyhunt in which Misra was quoted calling him a “crook”. Misra denied giving any such interview and pointed to a letter he had written in March 2019 to the editor of Odisha Post, seeking a published clarification on the same grounds.The court also observed that the magistrate had not examined the publication or the reporter concerned — a step that could have established, at least prima facie, that Misra had actually made the statement. In its absence, the court found “no independent material” linking the remarks to Misra.Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More Tags:delhi high court