Will MJ Akbar's defamation suit against Priya Ramani be transferred to another Judge after two years of hearing? .The Court of District and Sessions Judge, Rouse Avenue is expected to take a call on the issue today. .[MJ Abkar v. Priya Ramani] Case not\nfiled against MP/MLA; Needs to be transferred: Delhi Court.Akbar had filed the criminal defamation case against Priya Ramani for levelling sexual harassment allegations against Akbar. .The hearings in the case were in their final leg, when the Supreme Court recently issued directions for the expeditious disposal of cases pending against sitting and former legislators. .On September 19, Senior Advocate Rebecca John concluded her submissions on behalf of Ramani. .I deserve to be acquitted: Senior Advocate Rebecca John concludes submissions for Priya Ramani in MJ Akbar defamation case.On Tuesday, the Delhi Court was due to hear Senior Advocate Geetha Luthra's rebuttal on behalf of Akbar. However, the Court yesterday remarked that the case may have to be transferred now since it is a Special Court designated to hear cases against MPs/MLAs. .Live updates of the hearing today feature on this page. .Hearing begins. Matter is before Judge Sujata Kohli..Let's see what's there.. who is aggrieved?: Court .We are making a joint request that the matter be sent back to Judge Pahuja.. two years back, the case was marked to his court.. both of us argued in detail. I am on rebuttal: Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra for Akbar.There is no bar on that court to hear matters that are not against MP/MLAs. We are requesting that it go back to the same court: Luthra.I tender my sincere apology. Initially we said that it would be a joint request but we read the notification of the High Court. The notification mandates that Judge Pahuja's court is solely for MP/MLAs. It is upto this Court to decide now: Advocate Bhavook Chauhan for Priya Ramani.I say that Judge Pahuja's Court can hear this case as well.. if we may go back to that court to finish arguements, it will save judicial time: Luthra.You are right that this notification creates no bar on hearing of other non-MP/MLA cases.. I had been marking such cases : Judge Kohli.One file was sent to one such special court but the file was marked back.. I sent it back to the court again. Somebody should take it to the High Court: Judge Kohli. .But we must read the object behind the notification: Judge Kohli.The object behind the notification was to expedite cases against MP/MLAs : Judge Kohli.Seeing that, a complaint by an MP/MLA should not be covered. This notification was passed long back in 2018. This case was filed in 2018 only. None of the officers took note of it. None of the counsel took notice and everything continued: Judge Kohli.Suppose there is no jurisdiction, the consequence can be very dangerous. The entire trial is de novo.. I'm just discussing: Judge Kohli.Okay then. You leave it to me now: Judge Kohli .The issue of de novo trial may open a pandora's box. There was a complaint by MP Mahua Moitra and it is pending before a Magistrate before Patiala House Court: Chauhan.Additional Courts have been created. These are zero tolerance courts. The message is that these courts should only be dealing with MP/MLA cases: Judge Kohli.I think with regard to proceedings before wrong court, Section 462, CrPC may be an answer: Luthra.I am the one who is going to be prejudiced. There is urgency: Luthra .That's also a point. It is your reputation which is at stake: Judge Kohli.But do you think that is the object? : Judge Kohli.Basically there is no legislation as such..there was a PIL before the Supreme Court. It doesn't mean that cases by MP/MLAs can't be decided by special courts. All cases deserve expeditious disposal.. nobody had any objection: Luthra.We all recognised that the special court had the jurisdiction. CMM, Patiala House sent the Complaint to this special court: Luthra.It was just for me to finish my argument.. this notification doesn't exclude hearing of other cases. We are in your hands: Luthra.Advocate Sandeep Kapur for MJ Akbar reiterates the submissions made by Luthra. .Grave prejudice is being caused to my client: Kapur.As an assistance, we would like to hear an objective view. Is our Prosecutor here? : Judge Kohli .No: Court master.That's alright.. let's not call it is a legislation. It's a notification: Judge Kohli.Judge Kohli lists matter for orders on October 22 for order. .Order to be pronounced on the point of transfer of the case of MJ Akbar vs Priya Ramani on October 22 at 4 pm.