"Nawab Malik has raised very important issues on Sameer Wankhede:" Four conclusions by Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to restrain Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Nawab Malik from putting up tweets against Dhyandev Wankhede, father of Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) zonal director Sameer Wankhede.

. Pertinently, the Court observed that allegations made by Malik against Wankhede cannot prima facie be said to be false.

The verdict came in the defamation suit filed by Wankhede who alleged that Malik's tweets and statements on his social media handle were a tirade against his son started only after Malik’s son-in-law Sameer Khan was arrested by NCB in January this year under NDPS Act.

The High Court today pronounced its verdict on the interim application in the suit which sought a temporary injunction restraining Malik and his party members from making any statements in the future about Wankhede and his family.

. Justice Jamdar framed the following questions for his consideration on the tweets and statements which formed the subject matter of this suit.

Whether they were concerning acts and conduct of the public official relevant to discharge of his duties?

Whether the allegations are reckless with disregard for truth i.e. totally false?

Whether the said publications are proved to be false and actuated by malice or personal animosity?

Whether the Defendant acted after reasonable verification of the facts?

. Responding to these questions framed, the Justice Jamdar made the following four conclusions:

. Malik has raised an important issue

The Court said that the factual position as put forth before the Court revealed that Malik has raised an important issue about the conduct of a public official.

"The factual position on record show that the Defendant has raised very important issues concerning the acts and conduct of Plaintiff’s son - Sameer Wankhede who is public official," the order said.

. Allegations against Wankhede about his religion and corruption not totally false

In what could turn out to be a set back for Wankhede, the Court said that two allegations made by Malik against Wankhede are prima facie not totally false.

The first allegation was that Wankhede is a Muslim by birth and that he secured the government job by falsely claiming to be from scheduled caste.

The second allegation was that there Wankhede sought illegal gratification in cases filed by NCB.

The Court held the following on the two allegations:

"In view of the letter dated 15/11/2021 of Health Officer, EWard, MCGM produced on 16/11/2021 (after the order was reserved on 12/11/2021) it cannot be said at this stage that allegation No.1 is totally false. In view of affidavit dated 23/10/2021 of panch-Prabhakar Raghoji Sail, it cannot be said at this stage that allegation No. 2 is totally false."

. Tweets by Malik motivated by malice but not totally false

The Court noted that Malik's son-in-law was arrested on January 13, 2021 by NCB in an NDPS case and was released on bail only on September 27.

The tweets and other statements against Wankhede started on October 14.

Hence, the Court said that the tweets media content, videos, press conference etc. were actuated by malice or personal animosity.

However, despite that it cannot be said that what has been put out are totally false, the Court said.

. No reasonable verification by Malik but allegations not totally false

The Court observed against Malik concluding that he has not done reasonable verification of what he put out in public domain.

Despite that, the Court concluded that "at this prima facie stage and on the basis of material on record, it cannot be said that allegations made by the Defendant are totally false."

While refusing to grant interim to Wankhede, the Court also deemed it is necessary to direct Malik to conduct reasonable verification of the facts before publishing or speaking in any content which amounts to defamation of Wankhede or his family members.

. [Read order]

"Nawab Malik has raised very important issues on Sameer Wankhede:" Four conclusions by Bombay High Court

Neha Joshi

Related Stories