Bajpai's contention that he was not heard by the trial court before framing of notice against him was opposed by Jaitley's counsel who submitted that in a summons case, there was no concept of hearing an accused at the stage of framing of notice or before that.
Justice I S Mehta, after hearing the arguments of the counsel for Jaitley and Bajpai, reserved the order on the APP leader's petition.
He said he was not given an opportunity to be heard and claimed that the trial court order framing notice against him in the defamation case was "bad in law".
However, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Jaitley, said there was a gross delay in filing the petition and the application for condonation of delay does not comply with the proposition of law under the Limitation Act which says that each day's delay must be explained.
Also Read
Luthra also apprised the court of an order passed by another bench of the high court dismissing AAP leader Raghav Chadha's plea that he cannot be made to face a criminal case only for retweeting Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's tweet against Jaitley in the DDCA row.
The high court was hearing a plea by Bajpai who along with others was put on trial in the defamation case, filed by Jaitley against Kejriwal and five other AAP leaders in the controversy surrounding the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA).
Jaitley's counsel has said the plea has been filed after over one-and-a half years which "establishes a clear case of malafide and a sorry attempt to delay the ongoing trial".
In an affidavit filed through advocate Manik Dogra, Jaitley said petitioner Bajpai has stated three events which according to him have resulted in delay in filing of the criminal revision petition. These are Punjab Assembly election, MCD elections of NCT Delhi and the Bawana by-poll.
Besides Kejriwal and Bajpai, the other AAP leaders accused in the case are Ashutosh, Kumar Vishwas, Sanjay Singh and Radhav Chadha.
Jaitley had filed the complaint alleging that the accused had defamed him in a controversy regarding DDCA which he headed for over a decade.
Earlier, Jaitley had appeared in the trial court and said that Kejriwal and five AAP leaders had made "false and defamatory" statements. He had rejected the charge that he had siphoned off money from DDCA for his own benefit.
On December 21, 2015, he had filed the criminal defamation case against them and sought their prosecution for offences that entail a punishment of up to two years in jail.
A civil defamation suit was also filed by Jaitley before the Delhi High Court in the matter seeking Rs 10 crore as damages. Presently, Jaitley is being cross-examined by Kejriwal's counsel before the high court.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content