Kangana Ranaut moves SC seeking transfer of cases from Mumbai to Shimla, claims 'threat to life'
The plea comes a day after a Mumbai court issued a bailable warrant against Kangana Ranaut after she failed to appear before it in connection with a defamation case filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar
Actor Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court seeking transfer of criminal cases against them in various Mumbai courts to Shimla in Himachal Pradesh, according to several media reports.
This comes a day after a Mumbai court issued a bailable warrant against Ranaut after she failed to appear before it in connection with a defamation complaint filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar.
As per a report in Live Law, the plea in the apex court stated that the "petitioners face a threat unto life if the trials proceed in Mumbai, because of personal vendetta of Shiv Sena leaders..."
The petition further claimed: "It is pertinent to mention that the Maharashtra government led by Shiv Sena has been harassing the petitioners."
As per a report in Bar and Bench, the petition has referred to the statement by Shiv Sena leader and Member of Parliament, Sanjay Raut who allegedly called Ranaut 'Haramkhor Ladki'.
The petitioners have also drawn attention to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation demolishing a part of Ranaut's Pali Hill bungalow, as per the report.
The plea, filed through advocate Neeraj Shekhar seeks to transfer three cases to Shimla.
1. Criminal defamation complaint filed by Javed Akhtar
Akhtar had filed a case against Ranaut in a Mumbai court for allegedly making defamatory and baseless comments against him in television interviews.
The Andheri metropolitan magistrate's court had issued a summons to Ranaut on 1 February, directing her to appear before it on 1 March. However, Ranaut failed to appear on Monday following which Magistrate RR Khan issued a bailable warrant against the actor and posted the matter for further hearing on 26 March.
As per the complaint, Ranaut had made certain baseless comments on Akhtar which has caused damage to the reputation of the veteran poet-lyricist. It added that Ranaut dragged Akhtar's name while referring to a "coterie" existing in Bollywood following the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.
She had also claimed that Akhtar had threatened her to not speak about her alleged relationship with actor Hrithik Roshan, it said. All these statements made by Ranaut have garnered views in lakhs and thus tarnished Akhtar's reputation, Akhtar's complaint claimed.
2. Complaint by lawyer Ali Ashif Khan
Khan had filed a complaint at Amboli Police Station Mumbai against Ranaut and Chandel for promoting enmity between religious groups, insulting religious sentiments and public mischief.
In his complaint Khan cited a tweet allegedly from Chandel on 15 April which stated: “A Jamati died of Corona when police and doctors went to check their families they were attacked and killed, secular media, make these mullas + secular media stand in a line and shoot them dead.. f**k the history they call us nazis who cares, life is more important than fake image.”
The Twitter account of Chandel, who is also Ranaut's manager, was then suspended for alleged hate speech.
Ranaut then spoke out against the suspension of Chandel’s Twitter account.
As per the complaint, Khan alleged that Ranaut, while supporting her sister allegedly made remarks that intend to outrage the religious feeling of a particular community.
3. FIR for tweets against Maharashtra govt
The third case is a complaint filed against the two sisters on the same subject matter as above before the 66th Metropolitan Magistrate, Andheri, Mumbai.
Munawwar Ali Sayyad, a casting director and fitness trainer, accused Ranaut and Chandel of deliberately posting tweets to bring hatred and excite disaffection towards the Maharashtra government, filed a complaint against them in October.
They were booked under IPC sections 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race), 295-A (deliberate acts hurting religious sentiments) and 124-A (sedition), 34 (common intention).
The date of listing for this plea is yet to be notified, as per Live Law.
With inputs from PTI
On 6 March, 168 Rohingya found living illegally in Jammu during a verification drive were shifted to a holding centre
The ruling of the Supreme Court is reminiscent of the jurisprudential baggage that India has been carrying since partition
The apex court's judgment covers loans above Rs 2 crore, as loans less than the amount got blanket interest on interest waiver in November 2020