BJP MLA Rane challenges NBW issued in defamation case

BJP MLA Nitesh Rane has approached the Bombay High Court seeking cancellation of a non-bailable warrant issued against him in a defamation case filed by Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut. The court has redirected Rane's counsel to pursue the matter before a different bench. The next hearing is scheduled for February 21.

MUMBAI: BJP MLA Nitesh Rane on Wednesday approached the Bombay high court seeking cancellation of a non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against him in a defamation case initiated by Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut. But Justice MS Karnik redirected Rane’s counsel, advocate Milan Desai, to pursue the matter before a different bench due to his earlier involvement in a similar case associated with Raut. Justice RN Laddha is now slated to hear the matter on February 21.

HT Image

The NBW, issued by a special magistrate court in Mazgaon on January 30, required Rane’s appearance in court by February 21. The legal dispute between him and Raut dates back to May 2023, when he reportedly called Raut as a “snake”, predicting his defection to the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) by June 10, 2023. Both Shiv Sena and NCP had promptly dismissed Rane’s claims.

In November 2023, the magistrate’s court issued a bailable warrant against Rane, which was rescinded on December 15. The court also exempted Rane from personal appearance if he appeared for plea recording or recorded his plea through an advocate. His absence in court on January 30 prompted Raut’s legal team to pursue an NBW. Rane has meanwhile filed a criminal revision plea with the Mumbai sessions court, contesting the summons from the magistrate court.

During Wednesday’s hearing, chief public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, representing the state, characterised the dispute as a private matter between politicians, maintaining the state’s neutrality. However, Desai reiterated Rane’s willingness for immediate appearance if directed by the court, while emphasising that Raut’s insistence on plea recording would potentially nullify Rane’s revision application.

In his petition, Rane claimed that recording a plea would render his revision application before the sessions court meaningless and would deny him his statutory remedy and right. He argued that the sessions court should have acknowledged that he neither avoided service of summons nor absconded. Rane asserted that an NBW should be issued only as a last resort and criticised the magistrate for mechanically issuing the NBW on the third day fixed for appearance without providing sufficient reasons. He requested the cancellation of the warrant in the interest of natural justice.