FORMER UNION Minister M J Akbar, who has filed a prison defamation case towards journalist Priya Ramani, by means of his legal professionals instructed a Delhi court docket on Tuesday that her allegations of sexual harassment have been a figment of her creativeness because it was not backed by any proof.
Akbar has sued Ramani over allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment. With a number of different girls making related allegations towards him, Akbar resigned as Minister of State for External Affairs in October 2018.
The submissions have been made by senior advocate Geeta Luthra on behalf of Akbar earlier than Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra Kumar Pandey. However, her rebuttal couldn’t be accomplished and can be heard on January 14.
Referring to Ramani’s allegation regarding a sexual harassment incident, Luthra instructed the court docket, “Just by calling it my reality, doesn’t make it a reality… you haven’t proved whether or not you made a name to the complainant, you haven’t proved you met (Akbar).
“This version is a figment of imagination and not truth… After 30 years, you are trying to bring something without any evidence. It is all in the air,” Luthra stated.
Stating that “whether you make a whisper that a person is a thief or a cheat” it needs to be backed with proof, Luthra instructed the court docket, “You have to have empirical evidence which can stand scrutiny in the court of law. There is no such evidence in this case. There is no investigation. These are just statements…”
While referring to the ‘Vogue’journal article, Luthra instructed the court docket, “There are at least 10-20 places where the word ‘you’ has been used and clearly imputations and allegations are at a person described as ‘you’…there is no attribution to anyone as the author. There is nothing to show that these articles are proved as she doesn’t say anybody’s name.”
She reiterated that Ramani was the one who attacked Akbar first and there was no criticism towards Akbar and that Ramani didn’t take any motion regardless of authorized provisionsin the IPC.
