Bar and Bench Profile picture
Aug 23, 2019 40 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Court of ACMM Samar Vishal assembles to hear MJ Akbar's defamation case against journalist Priya Ramani.

Court to record Ramani's statement today.

#MJAkbar #PriyaRamani

#metooindia #MeToo

@mjakbar @priyaramani
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.

#MeToo

#PriyaRamani #MJAkbar
Matter adjourned till September 7.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @barandbench

Mar 18
[Day 2]: A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court to resume hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt Image
What happened on Day 1? Read here: barandbench.com/news/expansive…
Sr Adv Sanjay Hegde makes submissions
#SupremeCourt
Read 6 tweets
Mar 17
A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court begins hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt Image
Sr Adv CU Singh: There are two notifications ... Now the old industrial disputes act has been repealed.

Sr Adv Indira Jaising: Any judgment rendered by the court in interpretation of the old law will impact the new law. One side seeks reconsideration of Bangalore water supply and one side says no such reconsideration needed.

CJI: While taking a view on Bangalore water supply .. we can give a word of caution that the interpretation is for the law which used to exist

Jaising: There is an unavoidable overlap. All conclusions should be without prejudice.

AG R Venkataramani: so whether a challenge to the new law can lie when there is no such challenge before this court
AG: I have placed my written submissions and compilations for the Court’s consideration; I will be referring in particular to Volumes 4B and 5B. The principal issue, as framed, is whether an undertaking or enterprise falls within the definition of “industry” under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act and what the correct legal position is. A second, distinct issue arises from the 1982 Amendment, particularly in the context of social welfare activities and governmental functions, and whether such activities fall within the expression “enterprise.” This in turn raises the question of what constitutes a “sovereign function” of the State and whether such functions are excluded from the ambit of Section 2(j). To address this, it is necessary to go back to the earlier reference order and the line of judgments beginning with Bangalore Water Supply.
Read 16 tweets
Mar 13
Delhi High Court modifies bail conditions imposed on accused Neelam Azad in parliament security breach case. Image
The matter was listed before Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar.
The matter pertains to an incident in which some persons entered the parliament building and threw smoke canisters when the Lok Sabha was in session. Azad was arrested by the Delhi Police on December 13, 2023 and granted bail in July 2025 subject to conditions.
Read 13 tweets
Mar 13
Supreme Court hears the case regarding mandatory requirement of three years' practice at the Bar as a uniform eligibility condition for entry-level judicial service posts

Sr Adv Sidharth Bhatnagar, Amicus: High Courts are of the view that three years should remain. But for disability ..some accessibility needs to be given. Allahabad HC says it is not capable at the moment it is too early for a view. Delhi HC says three year practice has been reintroduced as in terms of SC judgment. Committee says relaxation for disabled may lead to disparityImage
Amicus: Faizan Mustafa for CNLU says no experience needed at all and should be done away with.
Sr Adv Pinky Anand: This practice is not even consistent to their skills of being adjudicators. Thus this is a Roadblock. Average age of aspirant will be 29.
Read 12 tweets
Mar 13
“If you keep on investigating when will charges be heard? For two years you cannot sit when somebody is in jail”: Delhi High Court to Delhi government in bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Naresh Balyan in connection with his arrest under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).Image
The matter was listed before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The Court today heard arguments on behalf of Balyan. Senior Advocate Rebecca John apeared for Balyan.
John - They took my voice samples. They have not taken voice samples of anybody else. We dont know if it is gangster, they are claiming that it is a gangster. Who is this other person?
Read 15 tweets
Mar 10
Supreme Court hears plea against the violation of woman rights under the succession laws under Muslim personal law

CJI Surya Kant: You are challenging 1937 act.. then what will apply? What about the vaccum?

Adv Prashant Bhushan: Shariah law says woman entitled to half of what men are entitled to. So in Shayara Bano held that even triple talaq was part of personal law but still struck down since violative of article 14

CJI: suppose there are two statutes. One protects article 14 and one does not. Ofcourse the other is struck down. Then our question what about the vaccum created

Bhushan: Indian succession act shall govern.Image
Justice Bagchi: If 1937 act is not there..will Muslim succession not be governed by personal law as under Article 372.
CJI: in our over anxiety of reforms we may end up depriving them (Muslim woman) on getting less than what they are already getting. If it goes away (the 1937 act) then what is the question.
#SupremeCourt Image
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(