NEW DELHI: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal’s “thulla” remark , referring to policemen who extort money from roadside vendors, is not defamatory, a city court ruled on Monday and discharged the chief minister in a case filed by policeman Ajay Kumar Taneja The court also held the expression “thulla” — Kejriwal used it during a news interview in 2015 — to be a relative term to denote the performance level of a worker against his or her colleagues and not used to defame the entire Delhi Police. The court found nothing in the interview to “indirectly, discreetly or by implication” suggest the remark was meant for the complainant or in reference to him. Additional chief metropolitan magistrate Samar Vishal relied on an online definition of the term provided to the court by Taneja.According to it, “thulla” is a “term given to time wasted within a process due to a lack of motivation. Considered to be an issue of concern primarily to management, examples of thulla include slower rates of productivity than employees are otherwise capable of and longer break periods between performing tasks”. Judge Vishal, as a result, read the definition in consonance to what Kejriwal’s alleged remark, and said: “If any employee of Delhi Police, who wastes time due to lack of motivation (or who lacks in productivity/efficiency) and demands money from the street vendors, it is unacceptable that no action should be taken against him”.The judge added, “Therefore, when the statement given by the accused is read as a whole, it is not per se defamatory.” The policeman had felt “ashamed” and was not in a position to offer a satisfactory answer after his 12- year-old son asked him the meaning of the word “thulla” after watching the interview on July 17, 2015. Appearing for Kejriwal, counsel Mohd Irshad contended the words spoken by his client clearly indicated that he had made a reference to those policemen who extorted money from roadside vendors. Irshad argued that the word was not addressed to the whole of Delhi Police but to that section among the force who indulged in taking bribes and extorting money.The court noted that it was an undisputed fact that during the interview, the accused had not defamed the entire Delhi Police. “Delhi Police is a large body of police force consisting police officers of various designations and ranks, etc. During arguments, it was informed by complainant himself that the strength of the force is around 80,000.Therefore, in my view, such a large body cannot qualify to be a collection or association of persons capable of being defamed as a whole,” judge Vishal noted. Interestingly, Taneja’s son was not examined to prove his point. “It seems that his son only asked the meaning of that word. It’s by mere asking that the complainant was hurt,” the court observed. “Arvind Kejriwal is, therefore, discharged,” it ordered.