Kangana-Akhtar case: Court says its oral directions with media present can’t be considered a threat

Ranaut had sought transfer of a defamation complaint filed against her by Akhtar and a counter-complaint filed by her alleging criminal intimidation against him. Her petition sought the transfer of the pleas from the magistrate currently hearing the cases in Andheri to another court.

Among the grounds, Ranaut had submitted that on one hearing, the magistrate had said that he would issue a warrant against her on the next date if she failed to appear before it. It was submitted that this was reported by the media and it amounted to an open threat.

“In respect of the presence of media persons and threats to which the applicant has referred to some tweets, digital news on TV, newspapers. It is to be noted that both applicant (Ranaut) and respondent (Akhtar) are celebrities. Nowadays, we know whenever any proceeding against any celebrity is filed in the court of law or in any police station, several media persons collect the news for their media house,” additional principal judge S M Bhosale said in his order which was made available on Friday.

“It has been specifically denied by the Ld MM (metropolitan magistrate) that he has given any threat. But the report states that media persons were present. It is a general practice that court gives oral directions sometimes, it does not mean that it is a threat,” the order added.

While Ranaut had alleged bias as a ground for seeking the transfer, the court said that mere allegation that there is apprehension that justice will not be done does not suffice. “In the absence of any material demonstrating the apprehension that justice will not be done, without any bias, such application for transfer cannot be entertained,” the court said.