Caught in plagiarism row, Bihar CM Nitish Kumar fined Rs 20,000 by Delhi High Court

Following a lawsuit filed by a JNU student, the Delhi High Court has dismissed Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s plea to remove his name a defendant in a copyright violation case. Further, the Delhi HC has imposed a cost of Rs 20,000 on the Bihar CM. Former JNU student, Atul Kumar Singh a filed a lawsuit alleging that his PhD research work has been plagiarised in a book ‘Special Category Status: A Case of Bihar’, published by the Asian Development Research Institute (ADRI) by its member secretary Shaibal Gupta and more importantly, endorsed by Nitish Kumar.

While the Bihar CM stated that he had no direct or indirect association with other defendants and had only endorsed the book, the JNU scholar claimed that Nitish Kumar, other than just endorsing the book, had even written an introduction for it.

As reported by Catch News, Singh was quoted saying, “Nitish Kumar cannot get his name deleted as a defendant, as it had been filed purely on the grounds of privilege of his office. He has endorsed the book and even wrote an introduction for it. I can’t talk about the matter further, as the matter is sub judice. But I am glad the court is doing its job.”

Singh further claimed that initially the book was shown to be authored by Nitish Kumar but later after his complaint, a fresh copy was published showing that the JD(U) supremo has just endorsed the book.

Even as Kumar’s lawyers kept insisting that the CM has been impleaded with a ‘malafide’ intention to cause embarrassment, Joint Registrar turned down his contention citing that supervisors of the scholar had certified that the Singh’s work is original and the book was released a day after the release of the former JNU student’s research work.

Catch News quoted the Joint Registrar saying, “The facts are cumulatively sufficient to give right to sue to the plaintiff (Atul Kumar Singh) against defendant No.1 (Nitish Kumar). These are sufficient grounds to sue Kumar. Therefore, Kumar is both necessary as well as proper party to suit, as in his absence, no effective decree can be passed in the present suit. Further, presence of Gupta is necessary in order to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all disputes in the suit. The present interim application (by Nitish Kumar) is sheer abuse of process of law. Same is dismissed with cost of Rs 20,000.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *