Caveat Filed By Javed Akhtar In The Kangana Ranaut’s Transfer Plea

OVERVIEW

The eminent writer-lyricist Javed Akhtar has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court in response to the plea made by Bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel to transfer the defamation case against her from Mumbai to Shimla.

A Caveat is a Notice given by a person, in which the Caveator (person filing the Caveat) is given a fair hearing informing the Court when another person who may have filed a suit or application against must be given a fair hearing before the Hon’ble Court decides any matter brought before it in the relevant case.

The actress and her sister duo were charged with a criminal defamation case for ‘bad-mouthing’ the veteran lyricist in National media in a popular news channel after the very controversial death of  widely loved  actor Sushant Singh Rajput.

BACKGROUND 

Javed Akhtar lodged a complaint against Kangana Ranaut before the Andheri Metropolitan Magistrate for making inappropriate remarks against him in an interview, like him being part of a ‘gang’ before the widely known journalist Arnab Goswami on Republic TV in July, 2020 after the much controversial death of famous Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput. She also commented prejudicially about a meeting between her and the lyricist in 2016.

Akhtar based his complaint on the social media trolling, bullying and harassment that he was made to face due to such comments made by the actress. The complaint  was lodged under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC.

A bailable warrant of Rs. 1000 was issued by the Andheri Magistrate Court towards Kangana Ranaut when she failed to represent herself in the court despite two summons issued in her name, “wilful absence without any justified reasons despite service of summons” without filing any exemption application. The court opined that her absence from the proceeding ‘shows her conduct.’

The Court of Magistrate recognised the right of Kangana Ranawat to challenge the order of such Court in the Court of Sessions or the High Court, to which effect her lawyer Rizwan Siddiqui is reportedly planning to move the High Court in order to quash the proceedings of criminal defamation, lodged against her by Javed Akhtar.

FURTHER DETAILS 

In context of such proceeding and all the other FIRs registered against her due to several charges, the Supreme Court was moved by Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel in a plea to move all such pending proceedings to competent Courts of Shimla from Mumbai.

The reason for such plea was cited as, the cases if continued in Mumbai would result in a ‘material threat’ to their life and property because of the ‘personal vendetta’ of the Shiv-Sena party against them. They went on to accuse the Shiv-Sena led Maharashtra Government to ‘harass them.’

Citing example of how the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) had demolished the Pali Hill Bungalow of the actress, which was later ruled to be an illegal activity by the Court, her lawyer tried to argue the reasonableness of Ranaut’s fear of danger that could be inflicted on her and her sister.

In relation to such a plea, the veteran writer-lyricist filed a Caveat in the Supreme Court, which if granted, the Courts cannot issue an order without adhering to the principles of Natural Justice like opportunity of being heard with respect to the Caveator.

CONCLUSION

With respect to the complaint of criminal defamation made by Javed Akhtar against Kangana Ranaut for passing negative comments against him in an interview of Republic TV due to which he was subject to social media trolling, and which proved to be prejudicial to his repute and ‘maligned’ it, the Court had ordered the Juhu Police to conduct an investigation and submit a report. The complaint was registered under Section 499 and Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
When the actress and her sister duo sought transfer of all pending proceedings from Mumbai to competent Courts of Shimla, the case of criminal defamation as had been registered by Javed Akhtar was also one of them.

In response to such a transfer plea, the lyricist, represented by Advocates Jay K Bhardwaj and Nitish Massey, filed a Caveat in the Supreme Court, that he be given a fair chance of been heard before the Court decides on the transfer of the case of criminal defamation lodged by him.

WHAT IS YOUR OPINION REGARDING THE PLEA BY KANGANA RANAUT TO SEEK TRANSFER OF ALL PENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SHIMLA? LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS BELOW!