Wankhede’s father has filed a 20 page affidavit listing out 28 documents which prove that his name is indeed ‘Dnyandeo’ and not ‘Dawood’ as is being stated by ‘Malik’.
Shaikh: Since I was in police service all my records are here.
Court: What is name of your wife?
Shaikh: Zayeda. Prior to her demise, she had written down, that she got converted to Hindu religion and then got married but then continued with the name.
Shaikh: Malik has shared photos of Wankhede in Dubai after Wankhede’s statement of never having gone to Dubai. i am saying those photos are not of the Grand Hyatt at Dubai. Clear falsehood.
Shaikh: First it was me, my son, my daughter, then Sameer’s sister in law, where he is asking her about an NDPS case against her.
This is much before my son joined NCB.
Shaikh: I do not have the original certificate, I have said so.
He has said in the affidavit that he has “reasonably verified”. That is from #SupremeCourt judgment. What is reasonably verified has to be in a manner so that the Court is satisfied.
Shaikh: The certificate which is a photocopy has an asterisk on Dawood. So that document which he is relying on has been rectified. And there are 35 other documents to show the name.
Shaikh: Kindly note that I have said this is without prejudice to what my adult children will decide to do. They may decide criminal remedy. I as a father lf family have taken this step. My name is destroyed. My family is accused of fraud..
Shaikh reads out a supreme court judgement pertaining to right to privacy. none can publish anything pertaining to marriage, divorced, without my consent, truth or otherwise. If he does so he will be violating the right to privacy.
Shaikh: Unless the person has voluntarily thrust into controversy and if there is discussion on public document, and if the person has had a public life. My son’s nikahnama is not a public documents.
Shaikh: You do not have the proof of some birth certiifcate you have produced. What is the proof that I am involved in extortion? Just because I was in Maldives, just because certain film stars were there.
Shaikh: You say that my entire family is fraudulent, bogus rather.. You attack Sameer Wankhede, that is your goal, but in that you attack me and my family also.
Shaikh: For public officials the right to privacy is not applicable as long as it is in discharge of his duties. How am I a public official? My daughter? The fact that he is Hindu or not, how is that pertinent to his duty? Let that be.
Court: There are allegations against yiu, because you are his father. See the clause 3 from this perspective.
All of this is happening because of Sameer Wankhede, else nothing would have happened. Read the clause from that perspective.
Shaikh: keeping aside everyone, reading the clause from Sameer Wankhede’s perspective. The defence of privacy is not applicable when there are allegations pertaining to discharge of duty. Do these allegations pertaining toy religion, caste, marriage have anything to do with that?
Shaikh: Where the publication has proved to be false and with malice the defendant will have no defence and it will be defamation.
Shaikh: See this should have been done before.. We don’t know what is available in the records.
And what about my trip to Dubai? Maldives I understand is said to be richman’s paradise. But why Dubai? Because Don.
Shaikh: And as for the allegation of Maldives.. I went to Maldives much before Sail’s affidavit was filed. What was your reason of saying extortion based on this affidavit?
Shaikh: What I believe happens is, he makes allegations, then finds an affidavit to justify. What happens is that if you caste aspersions, then that has a stronger effect of tarnishing my image than direct allegations.
Court: We are restricted to prayer clause (c) and that is for future statements.
We will continue at 2:30 pm.
Hearing begins.
Shaikh: All judgments that I relied upon says that the effect of a defamatory action has to be shown to the Court for me to sustain the relief I asked for.
Shaikh: This allegation of Dawood, the allegation of Louis Vitton was not mentioned in the story, and this is all against Sameer Wankhede, but people stopped differentiating between father and son.
Shaikh: The question is how you got this Whatsapp chats? And did you try and verify the veracity of the chats? I asked my daughter, she said it is manipulated. And they have not specified in the affidavit where they got this for.
Shaikh shows a photo containing Whatsapp chats made by him.
Shaikh: I am only showing this to prove that with a simple app, chats can be manipulated. Those apps are available on playstore, and it took only 2 minutes.
Shaikh: There are experts here, meaning people more used to Whatsapp than we are. And Supreme Court says that these have to be verified. So these chats should have been verified.
Shaikh: When the media questioned her, she had denied that it was not an authenticate chat of hers. Apparently she has denied, but I have stated on affidavit that she has denied.
Shaikh: Despite disputed facts in that judgment, the single judge asked him to take down the tweets. After that the case came up before the Division Bench of Delhi HC.
Shaikh: It is my contention that because his son-in-law was arrested, he was not able to get bail for a period of 8 months after which he was granted bail.
Shaikh: NCB challenged that and it is pending for purpose of hitting back and tainting the actions of my son this tirade was started. This perception was created that Wankhede is an extortionist and bogus because of which the family is attacked.
Shaikh: Stating that we are all bogus and we hold extortions on family vacations. I am Called Dawood.
After that my daughter who is lovingly called Lady Don, using that insinuates that “this lady don who is she did you not know”.
Shaikh: In the past he has made comments against Anna Hazare. And now he is also targeting the Former CM saying there are connections with Sameer Wankhede. All of this to clear the name of his son-in-law. I am not from BJP or congress. Not any political party.
Damle: If a person is no more, then in that case the family members can approach for defamation. Plaintiff has filed the suit in his individual capacity, he should limit to the allegations against him.
Damle: The action against the Plaintiff has to be limited to the allegations which have been made against him. Not to his son or daughter.
Damle: You cannot add those in the present suit. Whatever has been alleged against the son, he is an officer, he can approach the Court. The daughter is a lawyer, she can approach the Court. Also nothing stops them from adding themselves in the present suit.
Damle: Firstly I am saying the documents are taken from public websites. Secondly whatever has been reposted has been taken from the social media accounts.
Court: This is a public document that is fine, but then the other documents, the photographs and all he is denying.
You are a member if assembly and you are spokesperson of national political party. You should be more careful.
Court: This verification is very important, because SC says it is part of right to privacy and it is fundamental right. Whatever SC has said you have to be within the parameters, which specifically says that verification has to be carried out.
Court: Do you admit to interpolation? Do you admit that the handwriting about that Sameer is different? You are officer of this court and you are senior designated.. you have to assist the Court.
Shaikh: Prime facie there is a profile picture of 2015 which says that he is Dawood Wankhede.
Then the birth certificate, which may be corrected, but then it was Dawood at one point.
Court: That BMC certifcate, apparently there is interpolation, can it be said that the remarks made are in good faith? Were the remarks made after due care? What is the due care?
Court: For concluding that there is interpolation, no rocket science is required. Hence this due care and attention is required. The level of verification should not be blind.
Coirt: you are making it very easy. For normal public there is an RTI application required, then second, then an appeal has to be filed, and then in writ petition the Court says give the copy.
Court: Verification is of some importance. By advocate it is, by judge is a different, different for general public. The verification of an MLA has to be of a different level.
Damle: Since it is coming from the public record, BMC, there is less chance of manipulation, hence I uploaded as it is.
Court: The document itself shows interpolation is there. If the general layman says he does not know, then that is different. If a lawyer says it is different
Court: There is a higher degree of knowledge required from a public servant.
Damle: Prayer clause (c) is so wide that I will keep facing contempt every now and then.
There are party workers involved. The suit should be only between plaintiff and defendant.
Court: So that others can tweet ( laughs)
Shaikh: Judiciary has recognized two modes for defamation. Civil and criminal. Civil is torts. Criminal is under 499. Civil does not have a codified law.
Shaikh: Civil defamation is decided on the principles of equity.
#SupremeCourt to hear plea highlighting the “inaction” of Supervisory committee appointed by the court to take care of material and safety aspects of Mulla Periyar Dam #MullaiperiyarDam
In view of a recent spell of heavy downpour in Kerala and the threat of floods looming large, the Supreme Court had in the last hearing issued an interim order saying the water level in the dam can be up to 139.05 feet.
Tamil Nadu govt has informed the #SupremeCourt that Mullaperiyar dam situated in Kerala's Periyar river and which supplies water to five districts of Tamil Nadu, is structurally, hydrologically and seismically safe
Supreme Court special bench headed by CJI NV Ramana to shortly hear a plea regarding pendency of criminal cases against MPs & MLAs and expeditious disposal of the same by setting up of Special Courts #SupremeCourt#MPs#MLAs@AshwiniUpadhyay
CJI: We listed this case since there has been issue of transferring some judges in some states who may be hearing such cases
Sr Adv Kapil Sibal: I had argued that in UP a magistrate court is not hearing such cases and it is being heard by sessions court.
CJI: This is sad
CJI: When we heard this case a few years back no one raised an objection but now when the case is over people are coming with issues
Supreme Court special bench headed by CJI NV Ramana to hear a plea by 17-year-old Delhi student Aditya Dubey concerning rising levels of air pollution in Delhi #SupremeCourt#AirPollution
The top court had earlier directed the centre to take steps and Delhi government to file an affidavit in this regard.
Justice DY Chandrachud led bench indicates that it is going to hold the Army guilty for contempt for not granting permanent commission to women officers as per its earlier judgment
SC notes that Out of 72 officers, 1 had applied for premature release. Out of remaining 71 officers, 39 have been granted PC and a letter has been issued on 29 October 2021 in compliance of our Verdict
Adv Sudhanshu Choudhari: The invigilators have accepted on affidavit that they distributed wrong answer booklets and how they state that it was their first time as invigilators. Such wrong answer booklets were distributed to 6 students
#SupremeCourt is hearing a plea by ex-fortis promoter Shivinder Mohan Singh against Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing (EOW) timeline stating that it would need four more months to complete the probe in the fund embezzlement case
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi Police says a reply has been filed yesterday in the case
Earlier SG had opposed the matter being taken up as a fresh plea in High Court again and said he wanted to dispel the wrong impression created by the accused and referred to the enormity of the scam saying the amount involved is over ₹ 1,500 crore.