Be Present On Next Date Or Face Warrant : Mumbai Court Warns Kangana Ranaut In Akhtar's Defamation Case

Metropolitan Magistrate RR Khan directed Ranaut's lawyer to ensure she is present on the next date, failing which Akhtar could apply for the issuance of a warrant against her.

Ranaut sought exemption from appearance for the day, as she is not in the country and shooting elsewhere. However, advocate Jai Bharadwaj appearing for Akhtar, vehemently opposed the application and sought a warrant to be issued against her.

Keeping with the current Standard Operating Procedure for courts, the Magistrate rejected Akhtar's plea and granted her exemption as last chance and adjourned the matter for September 1.

Akhtar had filed the criminal defamation complaint against Ranaut over her statements made to the Republic TV after Sushant Singh Rajput's death. In February 2021, Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri had issued process under section 204 of the CrPC and summoned Ranaut to court.

Kangana recently approached the Bombay High Court assailing the Magistrate's inquiry order issued under Section 202 of the CrPC and sought quashing of all the proceedings.

Permanent Exemption

In a connected development on Tuesday, Akhtar also sought dismissal of Ranaut's application seeking permanent exemption from appearance in the case.

Akhtar alleged that Ranaut has appeared before the Andheri Court only to cancel the bailable warrant issued against her. And her repeated absence shows her scant regard for the law and judicial proceedings.

In her application filed last month, Kangana cited her work commitments across the country to seek exemption from appearance in the case. Her plea stated that attendingregular trial dates would require her to travel miles from different work locations to Mumbai, causing her undue hardships and financial losses.

In the written reply to her permanent exemption application, Akhtar states that section 205 of the CrPC does not give a right to any applicant to seek permanent exemption in case of a bailable offence.

"The conduct of the applicant accused speaks volumes about the casual approach with which the present case is being treated. Coupled with the fact that until date applicant accused has not remained present even on a single date when the matter came up for hearing. Therefore, it is most respectfully, submitted that this court may be pleased to dismiss the present application and issue appropriate directions for the applicant accused to remain present before this court on the dates fixed," Akhtar's reply states.

He further pointed out how Ranaut managed to renew her passport by concealing the defamation case pending against her.

The Bombay High Court, on Monday, orally refused to hear Akhtar's interim application regarding her passport issue as she had obtained the order in another quashing petition. The court asked Akhtar to approach the complainant or the public prosecutor as he was not a party in those proceedings.