The Supreme Court on Monday confirmed the conviction of activist Medha Patkar in a criminal defamation case that was filed against her by Delhi Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena.

The court, however, removed the fine of Rs 1 lakh that had been imposed on Patkar in the case.

"Nevertheless, considering the submission of the petitioner's counsel, the penalty awarded stands suspended and we clarify further that the order of supervision will not be implemented," PTI quoted the apex court as stating.

A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh said it was not interfering with the order of the Delhi High Court, under which Patkar had been released on "probation of good conduct" but was required to appear before the trial court once every three years. Probation was described as a non-custodial method for dealing with offenders, where the sentence is conditionally suspended and the convicted person is released under a bond to ensure good conduct instead of being sent to jail.

The Delhi High Court had on July 29 upheld both the conviction and the punishment given to the 70-year-old activist, stating that the decision had been made after carefully considering the evidence and the relevant law.

In this case, the trial court had initially set specific conditions for her probation, but the High Court later relaxed them. It reduced the earlier requirement for Patkar to appear before the trial court every three months and allowed her to do so in person, through videoconferencing or via legal representation.

The case originated from a press note issued by Patkar on November 25, 2000, titled "True Face of Patriot." In the note, she accused Saxena of being involved in hawala transactions and claimed that he had given the Narmada Bachao Andolan a cheque for Rs 40,000, which later bounced because the account did not exist. She also called him a coward and unpatriotic.

In April 2025, a trial court convicted Patkar of criminal defamation, ruling that her statements were deliberate, malicious and intended to damage Saxena’s reputation. The court said her remarks were inherently defamatory and likely to create negative public opinion against him.

Saxena had filed the case 25 years ago when he was heading a non-governmental organisation in Gujarat.