Bombay HC dismisses Kangana Ranaut’s plea to quash Javed Akhtar’s complaint

The Bombay HC also rejected Kangana Ranaut’s prayer for quashing of all orders and summons issued to her in the defamation case filed by Javed Akhtar by the magistrate, saying the magistrate had applied his mind while passing orders.

The Bombay high court (HC) on Thursday dismissed the petition filed by actor Kangana Ranaut challenging the proceedings initiated by the Andheri metropolitan magistrate in the criminal defamation case filed against her based on a complaint filed by lyricist Javed Akhtar. The court also rejected Ranaut’s prayer for quashing of all orders and summons issued to her by the magistrate on the grounds that the magistrate had applied his mind while passing orders.

The Bombay HC has clarified that the order has only addressed Kangana Ranaut’s plea challenging the procedure initiated by the magistrate and not the allegations levelled against Ranaut by Javed Akhtar. (HT FILE)

The single judge bench of justice Revati Mohite Dere, which had concluded hearing Ranaut’s petition and had reserved orders on September 1, in the order said, “No ground is made out for interfering or quashing the proceedings on the basis of alleged procedural irregularity/ illegality adopted by the learned magistrate while taking cognisance of the complaint. The order issuing process dated February 1, 2021 reflects application of mind and hence, warrants no interference.”

Justice Dere has clarified that the order has only addressed Ranaut’s plea challenging the procedure initiated by the magistrate and not the allegations levelled against Ranaut by Akhtar.

Advocate Rizwan Siddiquee, for Ranaut, had submitted that the magistrate had not followed due procedure on receipt of the complaint and had assigned investigation into the complaint to Juhu police which he should have done himself.

Siddiquee had also said that the magistrate had not applied his judicial mind while issuing process or issuing a bailable warrant after Ranaut failed to appear in court. He had said that the complainant had not placed any evidence before the magistrate and the same was brought on record by a third party. Siddiquee said as the procedure laid down under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) was not followed, the entire proceedings, orders and summons issued by the magistrate should be quashed.

Reacting to this, advocate Jay Bharadwaj for Akhtar had submitted that the magistrate had three options — to either conduct the investigation himself/herself; direct an investigation to be made by a police officer; or direct a third party to conduct investigation. He added that as the magistrate had taken the second option, there was nothing averse, hence Ranaut’s petition was not maintainable.

Bharadwaj had further stated that apart from considering the allegations and taking the statement of the complainant, the magistrate had also summoned the accused but she had not appeared. He said the magistrate also went through the report of the police and the footage in which Ranaut had made the defamatory comments against Akhtar.

While dismissing the petition the court noted, “As far as the impugned order issuing process is concerned, the same is not solely based on the police report, but is a combined analysis of the verification statement of the complainant, averments in the complaint, the CD/pen-drive, police report and other documents on record.”