The Supreme Court has dismissed actor-politician Kangana Ranaut’s petition seeking the dismissal of a defamation case lodged against her. The controversy stems from a tweet she posted during the 2021 farmers’ protest, in which she allegedly misidentified a 73-year-old woman, Mahinder Kaur of Bathinda, Punjab, as a “Shaheen Bagh dadi” named Bilkis, and suggested that women like her could be “hired to protest for ₹100.”
During the hearing, the court emphasized that this was not a case of a simple retweet. The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, remarked that Ranaut had “added spice” to the post, indicating that there was more to the tweet than just sharing someone else’s content. The court noted that what was said in the tweet could be subject to a trial and that it could prejudice such proceedings if judged prematurely.
Ranaut’s lawyer had argued that she had merely shared another person’s post and that the originator of the original content had not been summoned. Despite this, the court held fast to its view that Ranaut’s addition to the tweet transformed its nature, making it more than a passive reposting. After hearing these arguments, Ranaut withdrew her petition, which the Supreme Court then dismissed.
This is not the first legal challenge in this matter. Earlier, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had dismissed Ranaut’s petitions against summons issued to her in February 2022 by a magistrate in Bathinda in connection with the same case.
The woman named Bilkis Dadi—who is widely known from the Shaheen Bagh protests—gained prominence for her courageous participation in the anti-CAA protests, where she remained at the protest site in Delhi despite harsh conditions and threats. Later, she joined the farmers’ protests and continued speaking in favor of their demands.
With the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the plea, the defamation suit will proceed, and Ranaut will be expected to respond in court. The legal proceedings will now examine whether her statements in the tweet go beyond permissible free speech, and whether the content has caused harm to the individual named in the suit.