Thread by @barandbench

Hearing in MJ Akbar's criminal defamation case against Priya Ramani to begin before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra K Pandey.

Case is at the stage of rebuttal by Akbar. Ramani has concluded her defense.

#MeToo #PriyaRamani #MJAkbar #Metooindia

@mjakbar

Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra appears for MJ Akbar.

@mjakbar

#PriyaRamani #MeToo

Hearing begins.

Can I join back at 12? : Senior Advocate Luthra

If I have some work, you may have to wait : Judge

Sir, I'll join by 12:15 : Luthra

If you get free before that, inform the reader : Judge

Hearing resumes.

I'll begin with cross examination by Rebecca John : Senior Adv Luthra

Luthra reads MJ Akbar's cross examination by John.

@mjakbar

Ideological u-turn is not blemished career and reputation: Luthra on @mjakbar joining @BJP4India.

In a newspaper career, there are right news, wrong news.. I don't understand this cross examination (on contempt case by Delhi HC against @mjakbar) .. what does it prove? : Luthra

When the paper was launched in 1994.. there would have been job opportunities.. : Luthra

Luthra continues to read the cross examination of MJ Akbar.

Whole version is denied. There is contradiction in their line of cross examination: Luthra

Suggestions don't prove a person's case. Wrong to say that this aspect (hotel meeting) has not been addressed. Fair and square it has been addressed and said that there was no meeting : Luthra

Where is the discharge of your onus.. claiming an alleged meeting.. how do I prove that I have come to Rouse Avenue court for example? There will be an entry in the register, some noting, CCTV ..: Luthra

There has to be something to prove it. It can't be in the air. You have to prove it. Just by calling it my truth, doens't make it the truth. You have not discharged the onus: Luthra

You have not shown telephone record, car parking, CCTV. Just an averment that I came to Rouse Avenue and met someone in court no 5. I have to show something to prove it : Luthra

Once meeting is meeting, something has to be done by the accused : Luthra

To argue in reply that we have not addressed the meeting is contrary to court record: Luthra

Luthra says there are contradictions in cross examination.

Luthra continues to read the cross examination.

I don't know.. somewhere they say there are two chairs and table.. this version and story is a figment of imagination: Luthra

It is unprovable after 30 years. No bring no contemporaneous evidence. It's all in the air: Luthra

There is one suggestion about Congres, one about Asian Age.. just suggestions. Suggestions don't prove a case : Luthra

The moment court says any statement is hearsay, the argument of Res Gestae cannot stand: Luthra on evidence by Ramani's friend, Nilofer

If I went to Rouse Avenue and I tell the vc participants that I went to Rouse Avenue, it doens't mean that I went to Rouse Avenue. Something which is not permissible is not permissible: Luthra

Look at the version and story which had been spun, harming my reputation. Please read the suggestions put to me. The line which she says that these three paras are attributed to Akbar.. what basis and investigation was undertaken before you whisper about the person?: Luthra

You have to have empirical evidence which can stand scrutiny in a court of law. There was no investigation.. Utter sense of irresponsibility: Luthra

Luthra continues to read the cross examination.

How am I to know whether she joined Delhi office.. there are 100s of people. She says she left Delhi .. how am I to know: Luthra

Luthra continues to read.

You say an invisible line is drawn in the article. It's a case you had not put up at the time of notice or your witnesses have said. It's a case you've not asked my witnesses: Luthra

There is denial of the truth by Ramani that the entire article is on Akbar. Ramani herself says the second portion of the article is false. It is without any basis : Luthra

You haven't brought any evidence to teh contrary. Did you write in the tweet or article? : Luthra

Luthra continues to argue that the entire article was on Akbar.

None of their documents have been proved. Their authors have to come : Luthra

She doesn't prove any article (referred to in the Vogue article) : Luthra

Her version is not even put..that she plagiarised so called other articles .. there is no attribution to anyone : Luthra

She doesn't say that these phrases used in the second half of the article are in relation to other women and Harvey Weinstein: Luthra

This is a classic age of falsity..what is the credibility of a witness who picks up quotes of other people and doesn't attribute: Luthra

There is nothing to show that people read the Vogue article as two articles. This shows the reckless manner in which the accused makes this allegation: Luthra

She said she said "didn't do anything" sarcastically. Where do you get this ability to look into what she's saying : Luthra

How are we to know that he's saying this sarcastically: Luthra

She's*

You meant it when you said that he didn't do anything. Now you are changing it : Luthra

What was the basis of your investigation when you called him a predator: Luthra

You didn't ask my witnesses if your statement was sarcastic : Luthra

The only portion that is exhibited is Ramani's tweet. Nothing before or after. This reference to other content is misplaced and not proved : Luthra

Mr Akbar only refers to her defamatory tweet. Only that is exhibited: Luthra

All of the Vogue article was on me. That's how I understood it. That's how a common man understands it .. you can't stretch language to form a defense. It may be a novel defense: Luthra

They made another novel argument. That I'm bound by the contents of an article exhibited by me : Luthra

Only an author can prove the contents of an article. I will give judgements in a bit: Luthra

The article is only marked and not proved : Luthra

Documents need to be proved. All this is wholly not germane: Luthra

The lis of this case is Ramani's defamation of Mr Akbar. There's some question of Ruth David, Prerna.. not material, not proved, not relevant to the case : Luthra

Can I continue post 2pm? : Luthra

Not possible. I'm duty Magistrate today : Judge

Luthra urges court to give at least one hour.

You can continue right now : Judge

I may have work post lunch. I can give you 20 mins right now : Judge

We are ready to wait: Luthra

I'll give to time form 2-2:45 pm after lunch: Judge

Give you*

Court breaks for lunch.

Hearing resumes.

John starts reading the cross examination.

Cross examination refers to Akbar not remembering the date of filing of complaint.

It's a matter of record: Luthra

Luthra continues to read the cross examination on Akbar not filing any other defamation case.

Ramani targetted me. I did not target her: Luthra

Falsity in and outside the court resulted in me filing this complaint. There is no complaint against me by Priya or any other person: Luthra

The complaint is to an authority. There is no such thing: Luthra

I'm showing one incorrect statement after another by Ramani.. : Luthra on Ramani's claim that the entire Vogue article was not on Akbar, that "didn't do anything" was sarcastic, her premature tweet on Akbar's resignation, absence of corrigendum.

No such statement is made when notice is framed. They said it's the truth. They say that same at the time to Akbar's cross examination. The regard to truth is wholly missing : Luthra

How can you make a grievance of a person coming to court with promptitude : Luthra

You say now you keep filing complaints against other persons.. I reserve my right. It was all started by the accused, Ramani: Luthra

Court has seen the line of cross.. first part is on Congress party then contempt. Third is with regard to the alleged meeting that it denied..next is marked documents which are not proved : Luthra

There is not a whisper that the contents in question are not defamatory. There is no regard to law. Since when do we have Indian Penal Code? 1860: Luthra

Even when there is no sexual harassment act, there was Vishakha judgement: Luthra

There were remedies available in law. They were available from 1860. Fact is, anytime there is a grievance at workplace, there is availability. There is NCW: Luthra

This reference to Medha Kotwal and implementation .. does that mean there is no law?: Luthra

The Supreme Court lays down law. Vishakha existed. To say that Act came in 2013, it is neither here nor there. You have not taken recourse to law. Your act was extra legal : Luthra

The law with regard to civil grievance also exited for misconduct. Nobody was remedy less. To take this ex facie untenable plea is not available: Luthra

Tarun Tejpal was 2013.. you had nothing to voice, hence you didn't voice: Luthra

Anything in consensual domain is not germane to this case : Luthra

What is germane is - did I have a good reputation? Was this blemished? : Luthra

What proof has she given of her research when she made an imputation? It is impermissible. My reputation is integral to me. A person's reputation is dearer than life : Luthra

This accusation against me has harmed my reputation: Luthra

We have thrown all limitation to the wind.. and then call it the truth when it is a falsity Luthra

If there is a legal requirement that witnesses who find the material defamatory must come to court.. At least I followed that law. How
Can that be a question in cross examination: Luthra

All the articles that I showed said that Ramani's article was the first one to accuse me : Luthra

Doens't matter if I didn't say it in my presummoning. I don't have to reproduce the language: Luthra

Luthra continues to read Akbar's cross examination.

If you had to actually raise awareness, you have to stick to the truth, facts and research. You have to do the investigative job of journalist where you can prove every full stop and comma. It's easy to malign : Luthra

She doens't feel the need as a journalist to call up the Ministry, department, PRO to confirm whether Akbar had resigned : Luthra

Then you say I'm raising awareness: Luthra

Judgement after judgement say that duty of journalist is even more onerous. Each step has to be of due care and caution: Luthra

In a stroke, you finished his 50 years of hardwork : Luthra

She's calling it the truth thinking nobody would know : Luthra

How did the world see the Vogue article? They all thought it's one piece.. There's no good faith here. It can't be for public good: Luthra

Public good can't be without any basis. When you make a statement, you have to do it with some responsibility. And in this case, the statement isn't even true. Public good comes later : Luthra

Luthra reads the statement of Joyeeta Basu.

Basu was called a tutored witness by Ramani.

Basu is a very respected journalist. How do you call her tutored? : Luthra

These are natural witnesses. Her witness is her friend.. : Luthra

Luthra reads Basu's testimony.

There was virtually no cross examination: Luthra continues to read.

I don't think any dent has been made. I'll just show the cross : Luthra

The reason we filed the complaint was because of the malicious tweets that destroyed my reputation permanently : Luthra

Luthra reads the cross examination of Basu.

I don't understand these questions. The tweets were per se defamatory: Luthra

What are you trying to say? A person has come to the witness box. You have to give some evidence to prove that he/she is tutored : Luthra

You didn't question her on your defense : Luthra

Luthra comes to Sunil Gujral's testimony.

Luthra reads the testimony.

Dissemination is clear, reputation being impeccable is there. Knowing him personally and professionally is there : Luthra

No question is put to him on being a tutored witness: Luthra

He is a natural witness. He is a neighbour, worked professionally with Akbar: Luthra

Just suggestions.. nothing to bring on record: Luthra

Gujral's testimony is unshaken. Basu and Akbar's testimony is unshaken. It's crystal clear: Luthra

We'll continue on the next date : Judge

Please conclude arguments as soon as possible: Judge

Matter to be heard next on January 14 at 11 am.

Court says after January 14, matter to be taken up next on January 18 at 11 am.

Conclude the arguments in January itself: Judge

Let Senior Adv complete her arguments on January 18, we will then take a date for our reply : Adv Bhavook Chauhan for Ramani.

Any date after Jan 18 will be given as per the convenience of both parties: Judge

Hearing over.

To say Priya Ramani had no legal remedy is ex facie untenable, IPC existed since 1860: Geeta Luthra argues for MJ Akbar [LIVE UPDATES]

@mjakbar #priyara
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…