My article, my tweets are a matter of record, Priya Ramani begins.
Statement being recorded in question-answer form.
It is correct that my tweets pertained to Mr. Akbar, Ramani adds.
I spoke the truth. My tweet was not malafide, in bad faith, deeply offensive, maligning and spun out of lies, Ramani.
I cannot say if it affected his (Akbar's) standing before family and friends. My allegations are true. His complaint is false and baseless, Priya Ramani.
I began the article with my experience with Akbar. The subsequent portion was not about MJ Akbar. It refered to the experiences of other females with their bosses. My tweets did not become the basis of articles in internationally known newspapers and websites, Ramani.
Akbar is deliberately singleling out my tweets and article. The articles were in fact based on the collective account of many women, including me, who spoke out about their experiences at the hands of Akbar, Ramani.
It is false that my tweets affected Akbar's reputation. I spoke the truth and there was no deliberate attempt to harm Akbar's reputation, Ramani.
Sunil Gujral, Joyeeta Basu, Veenu Sandal, Habib Rehman and Tapan Chaki are all close personal or professional confidants of Mr Akbar. They were all motivated witnesses in this false case against me, Ramani.
My allegations were not against Akbar's reputation as a writer or an author. My allegations related to being sexually harrassed and his conduct as an editor of a daily newspaper. My words were not false or offensive, Ramani.
Akbar's complaint is false and the allegations made by me against him are the truth, Priya Ramani.
I do not know the details of Veenu Sandal's career. I cannot say if and when she read my tweets or what effect they had on her, Ramani.
Sandal's statement that she was deeply distressed to think that someone whom she had placed on a pedestal could do what I had alleged is her personal opinion and has no bearing on my case, Ramani.
It is false to state that Akbar's reputation was damaged. I don't know what interactions Akbar had with Sandal but my allegations are factual and the truth, Ramani.
I do not know the details of Tapan Chaki's career or his opinion about MJ Akbar. All the editor editors I have worked with in my 25 years of being a journalist have writing skills, administrative skills, are exacting and demanding when it comes to copy, schedule.., Ramani
There is nothing special about MJ Akbar, Ramani.
I do know when MJ Akbar saw and read my tweets or what react they had on him, Ramani.
It is false that MJ Akbar has an impeccable reputation, Priya Ramani.
I do not know the details of Sunil Gujral's acquaintance with Akbar. It is false that Akbar is a perfect gentleman holding good reputation in society, Ramani.
I do not know which colleagues and friends Mr Gujral spoke to to form his opinion about MJ Akbar. But many women including myself who have worked with Akbar have had a a different experience, Ramani.
Mr Gujral does not know me and cannot comment on my experience with MJ Akbar. All editors are hard working men and women.. there is nothing special about Akbar, Ramani.
I do not know if and when Mr Gujral read my tweets, Ramani.
It is false that I damaged MJ Akbar's reputation.
I don't know the details of Joyeeta Basu's professional career and details of her acquaintance with MJ Akbar, Ramani.
Joyeeta Basu's high regard of Mr Akbar is her personal opinion. It is false to say that Akbar was a complete professional, that he was held in high esteem in office or in the eyes of the world, Ramani.
There was nothing scandalous about my tweet. Ms Basu is a false witness and her tweet, supporting the complaint, the day after I tweeted shows that Akbar's reputation was not destroyed or irreparably harmed in her eyes, Ramani.
It is false of her to say that MJ Akbar's reputation was permanently destroyed. My tweets were not malicious as she says. I spoke the truth, Ramani.
I do not know about Manzar Ali's printer details, Ramani.
Q. Why is this case against you?
Ramani: This is a false and malicious case filed to create a chilling effect against women who spoke out about their experience of sexual harrassment at the hands of Mr Akbar. It is an attempt to intimidate me.
..by deliberately targetting me, Akbar seeks to divert the attention away from the serious allegations of sexual misconduct against him and the public outrage that followed, Ramani.
I will lead evidence in my defence, Ramani.
My defence is the truth, spoken in the public interest and for the public good. It's only now that sexual harrassment at the workplace is regarded as a serious offence, Ramani.
I would like to share my story in brief. I was 23 when MJ Akbar, the editor of a soon to be launched Asian Age newspaper called me to his hotel for a job interview. When I got there, I had expected the interview to be in the lobby or the coffee shop, Ramani.
..But Akbar insisted that I come up to his room. I was young, it was my first job interview, I didn't know how to refuse. I didn't know that I could set the terms of my interview, Ramani.
When I reached his room, it was an intimate space, essentially his bedroom.. I was deeply uncomfortable, felt unsafe at Mr Akbar's repeated, inappropriate personal questions, his offer of an alcoholic beverage, his loud singing of songs, his invitation to sit close to him, Ramani
Later that night, I called my friend Niofer and told her what had happened. In Oct 2017, the #MeToo movement in America emboldened countless women and share their experiences of sexual harrassment at workplace. In this context, I wrote a piece for Vogue magazine, Ramani.
The piece was addressed to and titled 'To the Harvey Weinsteins of the World' where I spoke about many women's experiences with many male bosses, Ramani.
One year later, when #MeToo came to India and many women in media started speaking up, I felt, as a senior journalist, my responsibility to remove the clock the annonymity. I decided to name him, Ramani.
I spoke the truth in public interest and in the context of the #MeToo movement. I finally had the courage and the platform to name MJ Akbar publically, Ramani.
MJ Akbar has filed a false case against me. He has deliberately targetted me to divert attention away from serious complaints against him. Through his testimony, Akbar feigned ignorance about my story and my truth, Ramani.
It is unfortunate that women who had faced sexual harrassment at workplace must now defend themselves in criminal proceedings for speaking the truth, Priya Ramani concludes.
Supreme Court says Family Courts should ordinarily assess parents first and decide whether psychological evaluation of a child is necessary before directing such evaluation; lays down safeguards against unnecessary psychological assessment of children in custody and visitation disputes.
Justice N Kotiswar Singh:
• Family Courts must first appoint a psychologist to assess the psychological condition of both parents, particularly the parent having present custody of the child, before deciding whether any psychological assessment of the child is required.
• No psychological assessment of the child should be conducted if the Family Court, based on the psychologist's report, finds such assessment unnecessary or undesirable.
• If an assessment of the child is required, it must be carried out by an independent child psychologist in consultation with the psychologist already treating the child, with minimum interaction so as not to disturb the child's mental condition.
• Family Courts must remain conscious that a child's psychological needs change with age and may require periodic review and assessment.
• Courts must examine concerns relating to parental alienation syndrome and false memory creation against the other parent, while ensuring the child is not exposed to influences that may foster such tendencies.
Justice N Kotiswar Singh :
• We emphasise our role as parens patriae and held that child custody, visitation and parental access disputes involving growing children are dynamic in nature and constitute a continuing cause of action.
• Parents are at liberty to seek modification of orders before the Family Court from time to time as circumstances evolve.
• Parties must apprise the Family Court of the status of proceedings pending under the POCSO Act against the respondent, as those proceedings may significantly affect decisions concerning visitation and custody rights.
"Delhi will choke. God save us all if this is how you want Delhi to live."
Delhi High Court makes strong remarks over the Central government's plans to take over properties in the Lutyen's Delhi area, including the Delhi Gymkhana Club and the Polo Ground.
#DelhiGymkhanaClub
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the remarks while hearing a plea filed by the Indian Polo Association over the government's eviction notice.
The Court said that green spaces in Delhi were anyways scarce and the "little green space" remaining in the NDMC area is also being taken over.
The Court questioned if the government is plannig to make high rises in the area.
"Little breather we have in the NDMC area is also gonna go and all of us are going to suffocate and die," the Bench remarked.
#Breaking
“It’s not a small matter and not a standalone case.”
Delhi High Court orders removal of videos on social media platforms calling a sitting High Court judge "murderer" and blaming him for the death of 6 people in a building collapse in Saket on May 30.
Court passed the order after Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) filed a criminal contempt petition.
#Contempt #CriminalContempt
The videos were uploaded by a person named Dr Kapil Kakar, who claims to be a psychologist and social activist.
He is also stated to be the maker of a series called 'Black Justice'.
A Division Bench of Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Madhu Jain passed the order.
The Court examined the videos and stated that instances like these were becoming very regular and coming regularly.
Ceremonial bench to commence shortly on the last working day of Justices JK Maheshwari and Pankaj Mithal
#SupremeCourt
CJI: this is like a ceremonial constitution bench. (Smiles)
AG R Venkataramani: Most judges are regarded for compassion and creativity....the two judges are no exception.
SG Mehta: I have never seen his Lordships without a smile on their face. In Justice Maheswari we found an elderly friend who always helped us. Justice Mithal's court always had a warm and conducive environment..
Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: I appeared before Justice Mithal before AP HC and it seems like 6 months ago. But it has been 5 years. Other day Justice Mithal why are you here and not a junior. I like that. Your Lordships retire in pink of health. 65 is not a retirement age. Now we have to get used to the new lot which is coming now. It will take another 6 months.
NEET UG Paper Leak: Supreme Court to shortly hear pleas by various stakeholders seeking measures ranging from replacing the NTA to shifting NEET entirely to a computer-based format
Bench: Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe
#NEET2026
SG Tushar Mehta: as directed, we have filed an affidavit. It’s filed by Dr. Radhakrishnan. He headed the commitee. The recommendations, suggestions etc. were to be implemented this year.
Court: we want to ask, you originally were part of the expert commitee, how much of monitoring has happened about the implementation? How did this failure occur? Despite your monitoring on the basis of HPC recommendation, if this incident has happened, then there would be a problem with the recommendation. Or the monitoring may not have happened.
Radhakrishnan: we had recommended 60 suggestions. In the first 60, mostly they have been implemented. A few are still in the process. In 2025 NEET UG was conducted satisfactorily. There were incidents of power failures in some centres, otherwise the recommendations were implemented and it worked.
Radhakrishnan: there are two areas, the first thing we have done is involvement of all state governments and district admin for secured conducting of the test.
Court: what was not in contemplation of the HPC that lead to this?
Radhakrishnan: certain practices are under implementation. At the moment these are being taken care of for the Reexamination on May 21.
Court: monitoring commitee meets regularly?
Radhakrishnan: yes. Our target is to ensure reforms are implemented.
Court: the real problem won’t stop till actual accountability arises. Not in terms of so and so will be liable, it will be effective when we know which individual shoulders the responsibility lies. Unless you identify the duty holders it will be a diffused obligation.
SG Mehta: the buck must stop somewhere.
Court: unless we identify the responsibility. If something goes wrong, we don’t know. It is a most sensitive situation.
Mehta: Government is concerned about youth.
Court: you need to learn from other institutions.
Mehta: some new mechanisms are put in place for 21st examinations. It may not be appropriate to divulge what’s there. Otherwise it may defeat the purpose.
Court: Is there a regular office who conduct it? With institutional memory?
Mehta: the NTA is having institutional memory. But it does not have domain experts. We have got experts from the IIT system etc. they have been brought into the system.
[Regarding persistent delay in pronouncement of judgments by several high courts]
CJI Surya Kant: Amicus had filed four volume reports before this court compiling High Court wise data before us. All suggestions from HCs were also compiled for uniform judicial guidelines. We are of the view that this is a fit case under Article 142 for our intervention to pass uniform guidelines.
#BREAKING CJI: 1. A matter where judgment is reserved, judgment to be pronounced within 3 months of reserving. Faster decisions in matters of personal liberty etc.
2. Bail application orders ideally within next day and if reserved then decision next day
3. Bail orders to be communicated to jail authorities
4. Undertrial to be released same day of bail or maximum the next day.
5. The trial court to inform HC of compliance.
CJI: 6. operative part to be announced in court and reasons to be uploaded within 7 days. Cases such as habeas corpus, demolition etc.
7. Necessary changes to be made to the HC website by the Chief justice of the respective high courts.