We can't be a social media country: Senior Adv Geeta Luthra begins final arguments in MJ Akbar's defamation case against Priya Ramani

We can't be a social media country, argued Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra in former Union Minister MJ Akbar’s criminal defamation case against journalist Priya Ramani..Senior Advocate Luthra who represents Akbar, today began her final arguments in the case before the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja..Akbar had filed a defamation case against Ramani after she accused him of sexual harassment and misconduct in a series of tweets published in October 2018..Ramani has accused Akbar of sexual misconduct when she met him for a job interview in Mumbai’s Oberoi Hotel in 1993. .Although several women leveled allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment, Akbar had filed a criminal defamation complaint against Ramani alone..Following the allegations, Akbar was constrained to step down as the Minister of State, External Affairs..According to Akbar, Ramani’s allegations are “fabricated non-events” and a ‘figment of imagination”..Based on the witness testimonies, Luthra today asserted that Akbar had an “impeccable reputation” which was irreparably damaged due to Ramani’s tweets and her Vogue article..Luthra read out the testimonies of witnesses Veenu Sandal, Tapan Chaki and Sunil Gujral and remarked,.“These people have worked with him, lived near him, have been associated with him but have never heard anything untoward about him..”Senior Advocate Luthra.Luthra also read out the statement by The Sunday Guardian’s Editor, Joyeeta Basu who has been working with Akbar for decades and said,.“Akbar's behaviour with her and everyone around her was always good and that's a long, long time..”Senior Advocate Luthra.Luthra stated that Akbar built a high reputation for himself through his work and was also a Minister of State in the External Affairs Ministry..Drawing the Court’s attention to Akbar’s work on South Asia, Luthra remarked,“In that sense, the country needs such people..”.Against this background, Luthra contended that Ramani’s allegations lacked bonafide, were false and malicious, and no public good came out of it..She contended that the series of tweets made by Ramani in October 2018 as well as her Vogue Article which was embedded in one of those tweets were defamatory in nature.."All this, on the face of it, is defamatory.”Senior Advocate Luthra.She questioned as to why Ramani chose to speak out after more than 20 years, without any evidence..Stating that one could not be expected to defend oneself after so many years, Luthra argued,.“If there is a grievance, it has to be raised then and there before the appropriate authority... I don't want to jump onto a political bandwagon..”Senior Advocate Luthra.Luthra also rejected Ramani’s claim that only a portion of the Vogue Article titled “To the Harvey Weinsteins of the World” referred to her experience at the hands of Akbar..“My readers did not understand that only one line from the piece pertained to me.. Here, what sense does anyone get? She attaches the article (to the tweet made in October 2018). What sense does a layman attach to it? It says that the man is a predator, a pervert and the story is about MJ Akbar..”Senior Advocate Luthra.Claiming that Ramani had no defence, Luthra contended,"I'll show how it (defence) should be truth + good faith. The allegation is spun out of lies. The article itself is self-contradictory.".The Court will continue hearing Senior Advocate Luthra on February 28th..Geeta Luthra is being assisted by Advocate Sandeep Kapur, Senior Partner at Karanjawala and Co.