Now Kejriwal apologizes to Gadkari, Sibal
New Delhi: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has apologized to BJP leader and Union Minister Nitin Gadkari and Congress leader Kapil Sibal for making unverified allegations of corruption against them. Both withdrew their defamation cases against the AAP leader on Monday.
The development came days after Kejriwal regretted having accused Akali Dal leader Bikram Majithia of drug trade without evidence.
In a March 16 letter to Gadkari, Kejriwal said he was feeling sorry for making "certain statements, without regard to its verifiability, which seem to have hurt you...
"I have nothing personal against you. I regret the same. Let us put the incident behind us and bring the court proceedings to a closure."
He also suggested to the Union Shipping and Transport Minister that "we should put our energy to serve the people of this country in the spirit of mutual respect".
Consequent to the regret, Gadkari and Kejriwal later filed a joint application in the Patiala House Court, seeking withdrawal of the defamation case.
"Kejriwal has acknowledged that (the) complainant (Gadkari) was hurt on account of unverified allegations and expressed regret, in the larger public interest" and that "the complainant does not wish to pursue the defamation case", read the application.
The court allowed the plea and disposed of the case.
In 2014, Gadkari had filed the defamation suit against Kejriwal after he named him in a list of "corrupt politicians".
Kejriwal and his Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia also wrote to Congress leader Kapil Sibal and his son Amit, seeking apology for making "unfounded" allegation against them at a joint press conference on May 15, 2013.
"Now, I have learnt that the allegation I made against you and your father at the press conference were unfounded. I hereby withdraw all my allegations made against you and your father and apologize for the same.
"The damage caused to your esteem, the hurt cause to your family, friends and well-wishers and the loss caused to you is regretted," Kejriwal and Sisodia wrote in separate but identical letters.
The four -- Kejriwal, Sisodia and the Sibals -- then jointly wrote to the court seeking withdrawal of the defamation case by the Sibals. The court disposed of the case filed by Amit Sibal after Kejriwal alleged conflict of interest over his appearing in the Supreme Court for Telecom major Vodafone when his father was the union Communication Minister.
Kejriwal has been dragged to courts in several defamation cases by various political leaders, including Finance Minister Arun Jaitley and former Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit.
Last week, the AAP leader wrote to Akali Dal leader Bikram Majithia for accusing his of involvement in drug trade without any proof to back the allegations..
The apology triggered a virtual rebellion in the AAP Punjab unit, leaing to the resignation of Bhagwant Mann as its Punjab Unit chief.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Supreme Court hears batch of petitions challenging Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025
_vb_09.jpeg)
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India today began hearing a large batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan, commenced the hearing at 2 PM.
Over seventy petitioners have approached the Court, including prominent political leaders such as AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi, Congress MP Md Jawed, RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, and SP MP Zia Ur Rehman. Religious and civil society bodies like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, and the Imam of Jama Masjid Bengaluru have also joined the challenge. Political parties such as DMK, IUML, YSRC Party, CPI, and even Tamil actor Vijay, representing TVK, are among the petitioners.
Several state governments — including Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana, Maharashtra, Assam, Uttarakhand, and Chhattisgarh — have filed intervention applications in support of the Amendment. The Central Government has filed a caveat to participate in the proceedings.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan outlined two aspects.
"There are two aspects we want to ask both the sides to address. Firstly, whether we should entertain or relegate it to the high court? Secondly, point out in brief what you are really urging and wanting to argue?" the CJI said.
"The second point may help us in deciding the first issue to some extent," the CJI added.
The hearing is underway with senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners' side, making submissions.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the Amendment abolishes the concept of "waqf by user", which he described as integral to the Islamic tradition and recognized in the Ram Janmabhoomi judgment. He also expressed concern over new limitations introduced by the law, saying they would prevent rightful claims on unregistered waqf properties, especially those that are centuries old.
CJI Khanna responded, stating that while limitation periods serve a legal purpose, their impact would be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Sibal also raised objections to changes in the composition and appointment processes of Waqf Boards, alleging that they now amount to a “complete takeover” through nomination, violating Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
Senior Advocate CU Singh emphasized the charitable and religious character of waqf institutions and stated that the focus should not be limited to essential religious practices alone under Article 26.
Justice Viswanathan remarked that administration of property, even religious in origin, could be subject to regulation, while cautioning against overuse of the "essential religious practice" doctrine.
CJI Khanna made an informal remark noting concerns over the extent of waqf claims, pointing out that there were reports that the Delhi High Court building itself stands on waqf land. He added that while not all waqf by user claims are invalid, a balance must be struck.
The hearing is ongoing, with arguments expected to continue.
The Centre recently notified the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which got the assent of President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 after its passage from Parliament following heated debates in both houses.
The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it. It was cleared by the Lok Sabha with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
_vb_93.jpeg)
