English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

MJ Akbar’s defamation suit: Court takes cognisance, to hear on Oct 31

Published

on

MJ Akbar’s defamation suit: Court takes cognisance, to hear on Oct 31

The Patiala House Court in New Delhi today (Thursday, October 18), took cognisance of the criminal defamation complaint filed by BJP MP and former minister MJ Akbar against Priya Ramani, the first woman journalist to publicly accuse him of sexual misconduct, fixing October 31 for examining the complaint and recording witnesses’ statements.

The court said that it has taken cognisance of the offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.

Akbar, a former journalist of stature, resigned as the union minister of state for external affairs on Wednesday (October 17) amid a barrage of allegations levelled by women scribes about his alleged sexual, moral and ethical misconduct after Ramani related her experience when she worked at The Asian Age newspaper over 20 years ago when Akbar was the editor.

Following Ramani’s claims against Akbar, over 15 women journalists have so far raised similar allegations against him. Akbar is now a BJP MP in Rajya Sabha.

Akbar has dismissed all these allegations as being baseless and politically motivated. Earlier this week, he had hired senior advocate Raian Karanjawala and his firm to represent him in the criminal defamation suit against Ramani.

Calling his resignation a ‘vindication,’ Ramani had said she was ready for the legal battle. Twenty women journalists have urged the court to also consider their testimonies, and to be called as witnesses.

On Thursday, as the case came up for hearing in the court of ACMM Samar Vishal, senior advocate Geeta Luthra appeared on behalf of Akbar and argued that the baseless comments made by Ramani in an article and then on Twitter had tarnished the reputation of her client.

Luthra alleged that the tweets, retweeted by many, have caused irreparable damage to the reputation of the former minister. Akbar has resigned due to these allegations and they show the damage caused to his reputation, his lawyer argued.

To establish Akbar’s credentials before the court, Luthra talked about his 40 year stint as a highly regarded journalist and editor, a former Lok Sabha member and a union minister till just a day ago.

She asserted that Ramani’s allegations, which in turn provoked similar charges being levelled by a slew of other women scribes, had done irreparable damage to Akbar’s image and had not just diminished his reputation but made it vanish altogether.

ACMM Samar Vishal heard the submissions made by Luthra and said that he was taking cognizance of the defamation suit under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The court then fixed October 31, 12 noon, as the next date and time of hearing in the case when it will conduct an examination of the plea filed by Akbar.

While Akbar wasn’t present in court today, he will have to appear in person to record pre-summoning evidence.

The witnesses to be examined on the next date of hearing are Joyeeta Basu, Veenu Sandal, Syed Habibur Rehman, Tapan Chaki, Sunil Gujral, Manjal Ali etc.

Akbar had filed the case against Ramani on Monday, seeking her prosecution under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC for defamation.

Meanwhile, the Editors Guild of India and a large number of eminent citizens like senior advocate Indira Jaising and common people – men and women alike – who have voiced their support for the #MeToo campaign have urged Akbar to withdraw the defamation suit against Ramani.

The Editors Guild of India came out in support of the 20 women journalists who have named journalist-turned-politician MJ Akbar in the growing #MeToo movement, accusing him of sexual harassment. The top body of editors representing the media industry expressed its concern over Akbar’s defamation case against one of the journalists, Priya Ramani, and said he should withdraw the case.

“We hope that Mr Akbar will also display the grace to withdraw the criminal defamation case he has filed against one of these complainants. While Mr Akbar is entitled to all legal instruments available to a citizen to seek vindication, it would be paradoxical for a veteran editor to employ the instrument of criminal defamation,” the Editors Guild said in a statement.

The Editors Guild assured its full support to the other women journalists in case he decides to sue them. “If any of them were to need legal advice or assistance, the Guild will do the best it can to help and also appeal to eminent lawyers to represent them pro bono,” Editors Guild said.MJ Akbar’s defamation suit: Court takes cognisance, to hear on Oct 31

India News

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

Published

on

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The Canadian government clarified that there is no evidence to connect Prime Minister Narendra Modi or his top officials to any criminal activity in Canada, including the killing of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah. The media report further alleged that PM Modi, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval were informed about the plan.

Nonetheless, the same report acknowledged that the Canadian government had no direct evidence to support these claims against PM Modi. Issuing a statement, the Canadian government distanced itself from these allegations, mentioning that there was no substantiating evidence.

The statement underlined that on October 14th, because of a significant and ongoing threat to public safety, the RCMP and officials took the extraordinary step of making public accusations of serious criminal activity in Canada perpetrated by agents of the government of India.

It added that the government of Canada has not stated, nor is it aware of evidence, linking Prime Minister Modi, Minister Jaishankar, or NSA Doval to the serious criminal activity within Canada. It remarked that any suggestion to the contrary is both speculative and inaccurate.

Earlier, India furiously rejected the Canadian daily’s report as ludicrous, terming it detrimental to diplomatic ties that have been frosty since Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first accused India of involvement in Nijjar’s killing last year.

Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said that they do not normally comment on media reports, but such ludicrous statements made to a newspaper purportedly by a Canadian government source should be dismissed with the contempt they deserve. He added that smear campaigns like this only further damage our already strained ties.

Diplomatic ties between India and Canada weakened when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) accused Indian government agents of involvement in criminal activities on Canadian soil, including murder, extortion, and intimidation. As the diplomatic rift intensified, both the countries expelled top envoys in response.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar was gunned down outside a gurdwara in Surrey, British Columbia, in June 2023. Earlier in 2024, Canadian authorities arrested and charged four Indian nationals for the murder.

Continue Reading

India News

Parliament winter session: Government lists 15 bills, including Waqf bill

The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

Published

on

The government has listed five new ones and one to amend the contentious Waqf law out of 15 bills for the winter session of Parliament. The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

The government has introduced five new bills, including the Coastal Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to promote coasting trade and increase the participation of Indian-flagged vessels owned and operated by Indian citizens for both national security and commercial purposes.

Another significant legislation that will be introduced by the government is the Indian Ports Bill, 2024. This bill is designed to implement measures for the conservation of ports, enhance security, and manage pollution, ensuring compliance with India’s international obligations and statutory requirements.

Additionally, the government plans to introduce the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to meet India’s obligations under maritime treaties and support the development of Indian shipping while ensuring the efficient operation of the Indian mercantile marine in a way that serves national interests.

Pending legislation includes the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which is awaiting consideration and passage after the joint committee of both Houses submits its report to the Lok Sabha. The committee is expected to report by the end of the first week of the winter session.

Currently, there are eight bills, including the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, pending in the Lok Sabha, while two additional bills are in the Rajya Sabha.

Furthermore, the government has also listed the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Bill for introduction, consideration, and passage, which seeks to increase the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of Delhi district courts from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 20 lakh.

The Merchant Shipping Bill, along with the Coastal Shipping Bill and the Indian Ports Bill, is slated for introduction and eventual passage.

Continue Reading

India News

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.

Published

on

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare. The leaders allegedly restricted essential supplies such as food, water, and medical aid to civilians in Gaza, resulting in severe humanitarian crises and deaths, including among children.

Last year in October, Israel had launched attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack by Hamas. The Israel-Hamas war has led to the death of thousands of civilians, while lakhs have been displaced. The major infrastructures in Gaza, including hospitals and schools, were also destroyed as Israel vowed to wipe out Hamas.

The International Criminal Court stated that it found reasonable grounds to believe the accused intentionally targeted civilians and limited medical supplies, forcing unsafe medical procedures, which caused immense suffering. This ruling was based on the findings from at least October 8, 2023 until at least May 20, 2024.

The court remarked that it has assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that PM Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza.

Furthermore, it also noted that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and medical supplies created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, leading to death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration.

Additionally, the International Criminal Court dismissed two challenges by Israel against its jurisdiction in the situation in the State of Palestine.

Notably, Israel had contested the ICC’s jurisdiction, claiming it could not be exercised without Israel’s consent. Nonetheless, the Chamber ruled that the Court has jurisdiction based on Palestine’s territorial scope, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. It further noted that Israel’s objections were premature, as jurisdictional challenges under the Rome Statute can only be made after an arrest warrant is issued.

Reportedly, Israel had also requested a fresh notification regarding the investigation, started in 2021. Denying the request, the court stated that Israel had earlier declined to request a deferral, making additional notifications unnecessary.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com