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

Hardeep Singh Puri set to win Rajya Sabha bypoll unopposed

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to be elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Madhya Pradesh after the returning officer rejected the nomination papers of two independent candidates.

Published

on

Hardeep Puri

Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to enter the Rajya Sabha unopposed from Madhya Pradesh after the nomination papers of two independent candidates were rejected during scrutiny on Tuesday.

The two candidates whose nominations were rejected were Kante Sayanna and Rajkumar Lohani, the latter being backed by the Congress. Their rejection leaves Puri as the only candidate in the contest for the vacant Rajya Sabha seat.

According to an official, the result will be announced on November 5, which is also the last date for withdrawal of nominations.

The Returning Officer, Umesh Sharma, examined the nomination papers on the last day of scrutiny and rejected the two independent candidates’ applications.

Objections raised against Hardeep Puri’s nomination

The nomination papers submitted by Puri also faced objections from the two independent candidates and Congress leader Hemant Katare.

They questioned the validity and completeness of Puri’s affidavit filed in Form 26, raising concerns over whether the mandatory details had been properly furnished.

However, after examining the objections, Returning Officer Umesh Sharma concluded that Puri had not violated any requirements under the Representation of the People Act.

Sharma stated in his order that no defect had been found in Puri’s nomination papers that could justify their rejection.

Following the decision, Katare and Congress MLA Atif Aqeel announced that they would approach the court against the order.

Calling the decision an attack on Indian democracy, the Congress leaders said in a statement that Puri’s nomination should have been rejected despite what they described as significant errors.

Why the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sabha seat fell vacant

The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Union Minister L Murugan, which left a Rajya Sabha seat vacant in Madhya Pradesh.

With the nomination papers of both independent candidates rejected and Puri’s nomination cleared, the Union minister is set to be elected unopposed.

The final announcement is expected on November 5, the last day for withdrawal of nominations.

Continue Reading

India News

Yogi Adityanath announces free LPG cylinders on Diwali and Holi

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has announced one free LPG cylinder each on Diwali and Holi for eligible Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana beneficiaries. The state has allocated Rs 1,500 crore for LPG refill subsidies covering more than 1.89 crore beneficiaries.

Published

on

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Tuesday announced that eligible families covered under the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY) will receive one free LPG cylinder each on Diwali and Holi.

The announcement came as the Chief Minister participated in a programme organised for distributing LPG refill subsidies to more than 1.89 crore beneficiaries across the state.

The Uttar Pradesh government has allocated Rs 1,500 crore for providing subsidies on LPG cylinder refills to eligible families under the scheme.

Addressing the gathering, Adityanath explained the cost of a domestic LPG cylinder and the subsidy provided by the Centre.

“The price of one domestic gas cylinder is Rs 983.45, and out of this, the Government of India provides a subsidy of Rs 335. You have to spend Rs 648.55 from your own pocket,” he said.

The Chief Minister said the state government had decided to provide one cylinder to poor families covered under the Ujjwala scheme on Diwali and Holi.

“With the money you save, you can buy Diwali sweets and lamps,” he said.

Yogi Adityanath targets previous Congress government

During his address, Adityanath also compared the availability of LPG connections under the present government with the situation during the Congress government’s tenure.

He said people previously faced several difficulties in obtaining a single gas connection, while the present government had provided free gas connections to poor families.

The Chief Minister described the initiative as an example of good governance.

Yogi Adityanath on Ayodhya’s Deepotsav

Earlier on Tuesday, Adityanath described Ayodhya’s Deepotsav, scheduled for November 7, as a symbol of social unity.

In a post on X, he said the festival brought together people from different sections of society through shared faith and cultural participation.

He also referred to the Deepotsav tradition initiated by the state government in 2017, saying it had transformed Ayodhya’s cultural heritage into a celebration involving people from different walks of life.

The Chief Minister is scheduled to visit Ayodhya to review preparations for the event.

Continue Reading

India News

Election Commission clarifies Form 6 rules for existing voters under SIR

The Election Commission has clarified that voters previously enrolled in electoral rolls can submit Form 6 for inclusion if their names are missing from draft lists published during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

Published

on

Election Commission of India

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has clarified that voters whose names appeared in earlier electoral rolls but are missing from draft lists published during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) can submit Form 6 to seek inclusion in the final electoral roll.

In a communication issued on November 3 to the Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of all states and Union Territories, the poll body addressed concerns among previously registered voters who were hesitant to submit the form because of the declaration required alongside it.

The Commission clarified that submitting Form 6 in such circumstances would not, by itself, amount to making a false declaration merely because the applicant had been enrolled as a voter previously.

It also stated that no action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, would be initiated against such applicants solely on the ground of their previous enrolment.

However, this protection applies provided the applicant is not already registered in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency and the declaration submitted is otherwise in accordance with the law.

Why existing voters were hesitant to submit Form 6

The clarification follows concerns that some previously enrolled voters were reluctant to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll after finding their names missing from the draft lists published during the SIR exercise.

Form 6 requires applicants to furnish a declaration stating that their names are being included in the electoral roll for the first time.

This created apprehensions among previously registered voters, who feared that submitting the form despite their earlier enrolment could be treated as a false declaration and expose them to prosecution under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

The Election Commission has now clarified that earlier registration does not prevent an eligible voter from submitting Form 6 again when their name does not appear in the draft electoral roll.

Election Commission refers to Delhi High Court order

In its communication, the Commission also referred to the Delhi High Court’s October 14 order in the case of Nilotpal Datta and another versus the Election Commission of India and others.

The case concerned an applicant who had previously been enrolled as a voter but was apprehensive about submitting Form 6 because of the declaration that the name was being included in the electoral roll for the first time.

The High Court observed that the petitioners’ apprehension was misplaced and allowed them to submit Form 6, if they wished, for processing in accordance with the law.

The Election Commission’s latest clarification is in line with this judicial observation.

EC asks states and UTs to publicise clarification

The poll body has asked Chief Electoral Officers across all states and Union Territories to ensure that the clarification reaches concerned voters.

It has also requested officials to publicise the information widely through available media platforms and in local languages so that eligible voters are aware of the procedure for seeking inclusion in the electoral roll.

The clarification comes amid ongoing concerns and legal challenges surrounding the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and the process of re-enrolling voters whose names do not appear in draft lists.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com