The hearing in the defamation case brought by Former Union Minister MJ Akbar against journalist Priya Ramani in connection with sexual harassment allegations made by her is currently underway at the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate..Ramani had pleaded not guilty in the case initiated by MJ Akbar back in October 2018..MJ Akbar approached the Patiala House Court under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, terming the sexual harassment allegations levelled against him as “false, frivolous, unjustifiable and scandalous”..Senior Advocate Rebecca John is representing Priya Ramani. Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra and Advocate Sandeep Kapur (Senior Partner, Karanjawala & Co) are appearing for MJ Akbar..In the hearing today, witnesses supporting MJ Akbar’s case are being examined at the Court. In earlier hearings, Akbar had been cross examined by Ramani’s counsel..Read an account of the first round of cross-examination of MJ Akbar on May 4 here, the second round on May 20 here. and the third round on July 6 here..Live updates of today’s hearing follow. .Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate assembles to hear MJ Akbar’s defamation case against Priya Ramani.Counsel for MJ Akbar informs Court that two of his witnesses, Veenu Sandal and Sunil Gujral, are present in Court.Veenu Sandal begins her deposition.I am a journalist by profession and have been working for over 25 years.. I started working with the Asian Age around 1994-95, Sandal informs the Court.I got to know Mr Akbar when I started writing for the Asian Age. I wrote columns (for Asian Age) till 2009. I was writing for the Covert and The Sunday Guardian in addition to having written for The Asian Age, Sandal.While I was writing these columns for the Asian Age, I was going regularly to the Asian Age Office. I had knowledge of Astrology and Tarot Card, many of my colleagues often brought professional and personal issues before me for suggestions, Sandal.I have always held Mr Akbar in high esteem and have always admired him, being an author acclaimed globally for his scholarly work, an editor who transformed the face of Indian journalism, Sandal.At the personal level too, I had great respect for him because he had many qualities. Simply by observing him, I learnt a lot, Sandal.On October 8, 2018, I heard about the tweets published by Priya Ramani and the article she had written. I then checked online and read both the tweets and the Article, Sandal.I also read tweets dated October 10 and October 13, 2018, Sandal.I was shocked and it came as a huge jolt to me, especially (since) Ms Priya Ramani had called Mr Akbar a predator and (given) the other revelations she had made in her article. I was deeply distressed that someone I had placed on a pedestal could (do) what was alleged, Sandal.His image in my eyes fell and his entire persona before my eyes was dented and it was greatly embarrassing when friends and family and others began asking questions that left me red faced, Sandal.All these embarrassing questions and situations made me realize that his image had been tainted not only on my eyes but also in the eyes of others. His reputation had been damaged and dragged to the mud, Sandal.Subsequently, my head was in a spin and thought I had known him for so many years and I have never seen or heard any such thing before, Sandal.Since he was out of the country at that time, I could not question him about the allegations, Sandal.After he returned, I spoke to him and I told him how let down I was feeling and how every second person was asking questions, Sandal.He told me that there was no truth in the allegations made by Ms Priya Ramani. He also told me that I had known him for so many years, I could think for myself, Sandal.After due deliberation, I thought and realized what I had originally thought – (that) there was not a thing remotely similar to the allegations, Sandal..Counsel for Priya Ramani, Senior Advocate Rebecca John begins cross examining MJ Akbar’s witness, Veenu Sandal..I have never met Ms Priya Ramani, answers Sandal on being asked if she had met her. I had not read anything prior to Ramani’s tweets about any allegations against Mr Akbar by any other woman, Sandal adds.At the time of Ms Ramani’s tweet, there was were only her tweet and I didn’t read any other tweet. Subsequently, I heard there were other tweets by other women but I did not read them, Sandal.It is wrong to suggest that I have given a false answer or that I had read other tweets and articles of other women pertaining to allegations sexual misconduct against Mr Akbar, Sandal.John: You worked at Asian Age for a considerable time. Did you interact with journalists like Prerna Singh Bindra, Ghazala Wahab, Shuma Raha, Harender Baweja, Kadambari Wade?During my tenure, I interacted professionally with Ms Ghazala Wahab, Sandal.I do not know whether Ms Wahab wrote in The Wire or not but I was made aware that she had written an article about Mr Akbar in which she had also mentioned my name, Sandal acknowledges.I did not deem it necessary to confront her (Wahab) or talk to her about the said allegations because I knew there was no truth in them, Sandal.I spoke to Mr Akbar on his return from Africa ie. Oct 14, 2018. I spoke to him several times that day on the phone, Sandal. John: Can you give a tentative time? Sandal: It was definitely post lunch.I am not aware of the date when Mr Akbar filed the complaint but I am aware that he filed the complaint, Akbar It is incorrect to suggest that I did not have several conversations with Mr Akbar throughout the day, Sandal.Sandal’s earlier pre-summoning statement is shown to her. Court asks Sandal to compare the two statements for contractions. I have not deliberately introduced new quotes to improve upon my earlier statement, Sandal states.It is incorrect to state that I have deliberately given evidence that not once did any colleague said or hinted at any inappropriate behaviour by Mr Akbar or (that) I selectively and deliberately gave evidence against Ms Ramani although I was aware of other allegations, Sandal.It is incorrect to suggest that friends, family and others I met publicly did not ask questions about Ms Ramani’s tweets or that I introduced these facts to solely fulfil the legal requirements of the case, Sandal.It is incorrect to state that I deposed in favour of Mr Akbar because I benefited from my association with him professionally, Sandal.It is correct that I have written the article titled ‘Partnering with ghosts of the other world’ in the Sunday Guardian on Oct 13, 2018, Sandal responds to a query. John asks if this article, among other things, was written in the context of the #MeToo movement.Among other things, this article was written in the context of the #MeToo movement and other contentious issues. This article was on written as in introduction to ghosts , Sandal.Sandal agrees that she also wrote an article titled ‘Humans during day, snakes at night’.John: Is it correct that in your column published in the Sunday Guardian you frequently write on existence of ghosts, witches, supernatural being and communicating with the dead. Sandal: I don’t write about them frequently, I write about them always.My brief is to write about paranormal activities which includes the supernatural, Sandal explains.It is incorrect to suggest that I have falsely stated that in my association with the Asian Age, nobody ever narrated any inappropriate behaviour by Mr Akbar, Sandal.It is correct that some of the friends who spoke to me about the allegations against Mr Akbar by Priya Ramani also discussed the allegations made by other women in other tweets and articles, Sandal.It is incorrect to state that I am biased and a tutored witness, Sandal. Veenu Sandal’s cross examination stands concluded.Proceedings adjourned for the day. Matter to be taken up next on July 17..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.
The hearing in the defamation case brought by Former Union Minister MJ Akbar against journalist Priya Ramani in connection with sexual harassment allegations made by her is currently underway at the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate..Ramani had pleaded not guilty in the case initiated by MJ Akbar back in October 2018..MJ Akbar approached the Patiala House Court under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, terming the sexual harassment allegations levelled against him as “false, frivolous, unjustifiable and scandalous”..Senior Advocate Rebecca John is representing Priya Ramani. Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra and Advocate Sandeep Kapur (Senior Partner, Karanjawala & Co) are appearing for MJ Akbar..In the hearing today, witnesses supporting MJ Akbar’s case are being examined at the Court. In earlier hearings, Akbar had been cross examined by Ramani’s counsel..Read an account of the first round of cross-examination of MJ Akbar on May 4 here, the second round on May 20 here. and the third round on July 6 here..Live updates of today’s hearing follow. .Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate assembles to hear MJ Akbar’s defamation case against Priya Ramani.Counsel for MJ Akbar informs Court that two of his witnesses, Veenu Sandal and Sunil Gujral, are present in Court.Veenu Sandal begins her deposition.I am a journalist by profession and have been working for over 25 years.. I started working with the Asian Age around 1994-95, Sandal informs the Court.I got to know Mr Akbar when I started writing for the Asian Age. I wrote columns (for Asian Age) till 2009. I was writing for the Covert and The Sunday Guardian in addition to having written for The Asian Age, Sandal.While I was writing these columns for the Asian Age, I was going regularly to the Asian Age Office. I had knowledge of Astrology and Tarot Card, many of my colleagues often brought professional and personal issues before me for suggestions, Sandal.I have always held Mr Akbar in high esteem and have always admired him, being an author acclaimed globally for his scholarly work, an editor who transformed the face of Indian journalism, Sandal.At the personal level too, I had great respect for him because he had many qualities. Simply by observing him, I learnt a lot, Sandal.On October 8, 2018, I heard about the tweets published by Priya Ramani and the article she had written. I then checked online and read both the tweets and the Article, Sandal.I also read tweets dated October 10 and October 13, 2018, Sandal.I was shocked and it came as a huge jolt to me, especially (since) Ms Priya Ramani had called Mr Akbar a predator and (given) the other revelations she had made in her article. I was deeply distressed that someone I had placed on a pedestal could (do) what was alleged, Sandal.His image in my eyes fell and his entire persona before my eyes was dented and it was greatly embarrassing when friends and family and others began asking questions that left me red faced, Sandal.All these embarrassing questions and situations made me realize that his image had been tainted not only on my eyes but also in the eyes of others. His reputation had been damaged and dragged to the mud, Sandal.Subsequently, my head was in a spin and thought I had known him for so many years and I have never seen or heard any such thing before, Sandal.Since he was out of the country at that time, I could not question him about the allegations, Sandal.After he returned, I spoke to him and I told him how let down I was feeling and how every second person was asking questions, Sandal.He told me that there was no truth in the allegations made by Ms Priya Ramani. He also told me that I had known him for so many years, I could think for myself, Sandal.After due deliberation, I thought and realized what I had originally thought – (that) there was not a thing remotely similar to the allegations, Sandal..Counsel for Priya Ramani, Senior Advocate Rebecca John begins cross examining MJ Akbar’s witness, Veenu Sandal..I have never met Ms Priya Ramani, answers Sandal on being asked if she had met her. I had not read anything prior to Ramani’s tweets about any allegations against Mr Akbar by any other woman, Sandal adds.At the time of Ms Ramani’s tweet, there was were only her tweet and I didn’t read any other tweet. Subsequently, I heard there were other tweets by other women but I did not read them, Sandal.It is wrong to suggest that I have given a false answer or that I had read other tweets and articles of other women pertaining to allegations sexual misconduct against Mr Akbar, Sandal.John: You worked at Asian Age for a considerable time. Did you interact with journalists like Prerna Singh Bindra, Ghazala Wahab, Shuma Raha, Harender Baweja, Kadambari Wade?During my tenure, I interacted professionally with Ms Ghazala Wahab, Sandal.I do not know whether Ms Wahab wrote in The Wire or not but I was made aware that she had written an article about Mr Akbar in which she had also mentioned my name, Sandal acknowledges.I did not deem it necessary to confront her (Wahab) or talk to her about the said allegations because I knew there was no truth in them, Sandal.I spoke to Mr Akbar on his return from Africa ie. Oct 14, 2018. I spoke to him several times that day on the phone, Sandal. John: Can you give a tentative time? Sandal: It was definitely post lunch.I am not aware of the date when Mr Akbar filed the complaint but I am aware that he filed the complaint, Akbar It is incorrect to suggest that I did not have several conversations with Mr Akbar throughout the day, Sandal.Sandal’s earlier pre-summoning statement is shown to her. Court asks Sandal to compare the two statements for contractions. I have not deliberately introduced new quotes to improve upon my earlier statement, Sandal states.It is incorrect to state that I have deliberately given evidence that not once did any colleague said or hinted at any inappropriate behaviour by Mr Akbar or (that) I selectively and deliberately gave evidence against Ms Ramani although I was aware of other allegations, Sandal.It is incorrect to suggest that friends, family and others I met publicly did not ask questions about Ms Ramani’s tweets or that I introduced these facts to solely fulfil the legal requirements of the case, Sandal.It is incorrect to state that I deposed in favour of Mr Akbar because I benefited from my association with him professionally, Sandal.It is correct that I have written the article titled ‘Partnering with ghosts of the other world’ in the Sunday Guardian on Oct 13, 2018, Sandal responds to a query. John asks if this article, among other things, was written in the context of the #MeToo movement.Among other things, this article was written in the context of the #MeToo movement and other contentious issues. This article was on written as in introduction to ghosts , Sandal.Sandal agrees that she also wrote an article titled ‘Humans during day, snakes at night’.John: Is it correct that in your column published in the Sunday Guardian you frequently write on existence of ghosts, witches, supernatural being and communicating with the dead. Sandal: I don’t write about them frequently, I write about them always.My brief is to write about paranormal activities which includes the supernatural, Sandal explains.It is incorrect to suggest that I have falsely stated that in my association with the Asian Age, nobody ever narrated any inappropriate behaviour by Mr Akbar, Sandal.It is correct that some of the friends who spoke to me about the allegations against Mr Akbar by Priya Ramani also discussed the allegations made by other women in other tweets and articles, Sandal.It is incorrect to state that I am biased and a tutored witness, Sandal. Veenu Sandal’s cross examination stands concluded.Proceedings adjourned for the day. Matter to be taken up next on July 17..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.