Full Breakdown
Delhi Court Issues Fresh and Dasti Summons to Dhruv Rathee
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On October 12, 2026, Judicial Magistrate First Class Rahul Jain of the Saket court ordered fresh summons—and a dasti summons—to be issued to YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in a criminal defamation case filed in 2018. The summons, addressed to Rathee’s residence in Sector 56, Gurugram, Haryana, require his appearance before the court on October 17, 2026. The order follows a long-standing effort by the complainant, BJP IT Cell member Vikas Pandey (also known as Vikas Sankrityayan), to serve Rathee after earlier summons issued in July 2019 remained ineffective.
Background & Context
The dispute originates from Rathee’s 2018 YouTube video titled “BJP IT Cell Part 2.” In the video, Rathee alleged that Pandey was the second-in-command of the BJP’s IT cell and that Pandey had offered INR50 lakh to an individual named Mahavir Prasad to withdraw allegations of spreading false information. Pandey, founder of the social-media page “I Support Narendra Modi,” filed a criminal defamation complaint under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. The matter later involved former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who had retweeted the video; Kejriwal apologized before the Supreme Court in February 2024, but the proceedings against Rathee continued in the magistrate’s court.
Data & Statistics
- 2018 – Defamation complaint filed by Vikas Pandey.
- July 2019 – First court summons issued to Rathee (service unsuccessful).
- Seven years – Duration Rathee has reportedly resided in Austria, according to his counsel.
- October 12, 2026 – Date of the court’s order for fresh and dasti summons.
- October 17, 2026 – Scheduled hearing date for Rathee’s appearance.
Official Statements & Responses
Advocate Samaksh Sharma, representing Pandey, told the court that Rathee “ordinarily resides in Austria” and had traveled to India to attend the ongoing Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protests in Delhi. Citing the prolonged difficulty in serving the earlier summons, Sharma requested fresh summons and dasti service so that the complainant could accompany the process server. The magistrate accepted the request, directing that the fresh summons be issued to the Gurugram address and that the process fee be filed within two days. The court also ordered daily issuance of the process by court staff.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on whether the summons has actually been served. Lawbeat and the observer post note that service will be confirmed through the process server’s report when the case is taken up on October 17, 2026. The court’s October 12 order records only the issuance of fresh and dasti summons; it does not confirm service, leaving the matter unresolved pending the next hearing.
Verbatim Quotes
- “From the available record, it is clear that the complainant has been trying to serve the accused no. 1 (Rathee) since the last several years…” — the court