Mumbai Court Rejects Kangana Ranaut's Plea To Transfer Defamation Case Filed By Javed Akhtar

Update: 2021-10-21 08:56 GMT
story

A Mumbai Court has rejected Kangana Ranaut's plea to transfer the defamation case filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar out of the 10th court Andheri.Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S.T. Dande passed the order on Ranaut's plea alleging bias against the trial judge RR Khan, stating that she had "lost faith in the court". During a previous hearing, the Addl. CMM had...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

A Mumbai Court has rejected Kangana Ranaut's plea to transfer the defamation case filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar out of the 10th court Andheri.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S.T. Dande passed the order on Ranaut's plea alleging bias against the trial judge RR Khan, stating that she had "lost faith in the court".

During a previous hearing, the Addl. CMM had sought Magistrate RR Khan's response on Ranaut's allegations against him. The report is confidential.

Addl CMM Dande heard Advocate Rizwan Siddiqeee for Ranaut and Advocate Jay Bharadwaj for Akhtar, on Wednesday.

Siddiquee argued that the judge was constantly directing Ranaut to remain present in court to record her 'plea' and begin the trial against her, if at all. He claimed this was a simple case of defamation, which is non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable. Therefore, the plea, where she would either accept or refuse allegations could easily be recorded in her absence.

Siddiquee further said that Ranaut could easily be represented through a lawyer, who would complete the formalities on her behalf. He further alleged that the Magistrate made unwarranted remarks against Ranaut and issued the arrest warrant.

For Akhtar, Advocate Jay Bharadwaj argued that Ranaut has been deliberately missing court hearings which is why her plea could not be recorded in terms of Section 251 Cr.P.C after the court took cognisance of Akhtar's private complaint under section 204 of the CrPC.

He claimed that procedural aspects of the matter have already been unsuccessfully challenged by Ranaut before the Revisional Court, at Dindoshi (by way of a revision petition) and by way of a quashing petition before the Bombay High Court.

He referred to the judicial record in order to show that the Magistrate in question accommodated Ranaut on 6 occasions (excluding the dates when 2nd phase Covid SOPs were in place).

Bharadwaj referenced the alleged defamatory tweets, which tantamount to continuing defamation and the fact that the complainant being a senior citizen has been diligently present on each and every date of hearing

Background

Akhtar has accused Ranaut of damaging his "immaculate reputation" by dragging his name in actor Sushant Singh Rajput's death in her interview with Republic TV Anchor Arnab Goswami, on July 19, 2020.

Following a police investigation in Akhtar's complaint, on February 1, the Metropolitan Magistrate issued process against Ranaut under Section 204 of CrPC and directed her to appear on March 1 to record her plea.

On September 20, Ranaut finally appeared before the Andheri court but the matter could not proceed as she sought transfer of the case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Metropolitan Magistrate RR Khan had then adjourned the defamation case saying it would not be right to proceed in such circumstance.

Case Title: Kangana Ranaut v. The State of Maharashtra

Tags:    

Similar News