[LIVE-UPDATES] [MJ Akbar Vs Priya Ramani Defamation Case] Final Arguments By Senior Advocate Rebecca John

John: complainant's arguments that Ramani's tweets are per se defamatory is legally unsustainable, considering the evidence given by the defence. 

John reiterates that imputation is not defamatory when it is a truth, made in good faith and to serve a public interest. 

John highlights that the complainant has to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt

'Defence only has to satisfy the preponderance of probabilities', she argues.

John: By calling Ramani's tweets 'per se' defamatory, they've not taken into the account the defence of truth taken by Ramani

'This argument is misplaced and not sustainable', John argues

John: I will be replying to the arguments made by the complainant, challenge the objections raised by them, and then make my final statement

Senior Adv Rebecca John commences her arguments

In the last hearing, John had argued that Ramani's Vogue article is her truth, which she made in good faith and in the public interest - to inspire other women to come forward and share their stories. 

MJ Akbar v. Priya Ramani: Senior Adv Rebecca John will shortly commence the last leg of her final arguments on behalf of Ramani