
advertisement
A Delhi court has issued bailable warrants against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in connection with a 2018 defamation case. The case was initiated following a complaint by Vikas Sanskrityayan, who alleged that Rathee published a video containing defamatory statements. The court acted after being informed that a notice served to Rathee could not be delivered as the premises was locked. The matter is now scheduled for hearing on 31 October 2026.
According to Live Law, the complaint pertains to a video titled "BJP IT Cell Part II," which Rathee, who resides in Germany, allegedly published and circulated. The complainant claimed that the video made several false allegations against him, prompting the legal action.
The judicial order was issued by Judicial Magistrate First Class South East Rahul Jain of Saket Courts. Court records indicated that the complainant had previously sought to expedite the hearing, arguing that Rathee was currently in India for a protest and that previous attempts to serve summons had been delayed due to Rathee’s residence abroad.
Efforts to serve the summons were made after the complainant provided information suggesting Rathee’s presence in Haryana. Legal proceedings were advanced after the court was informed that the notice could not be delivered at the given address, as the premises was found locked.
"The service of summons had been delayed for the last several years as Rathee lives abroad," the complainant argued, according to the court order.
The court had earlier issued fresh summons after the complainant moved an application for preponement of the matter, which was originally listed for 20 November 2026. Case documents confirmed that the complainant sought prompt steps for service upon Rathee, citing his temporary presence in India.
At the end of the hearing, the court directed that the matter be listed for further proceedings on 31 October 2026 as per the latest schedule.
"Judicial Magistrate First Class South East Rahul Jain of Saket Courts issued the bailable warrants, after the Court was informed that notice was served to Rathee but the premises was locked," the order stated.
The court’s decision to issue bailable warrants follows procedural requirements after unsuccessful attempts to serve summons. Further developments in the case will be determined at the next scheduled hearing.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.