In a detailed order rejecting Kangana Ranaut’s plea for transfer of veteran lyricist and writer Javed Akhtar’s defamation complaint against her, from the magistrate currently hearing the case, a sessions court in Bombay observed that giving oral directions in the presence of media doesn’t mean that it is a threat. The court said that there was no material to conclude that the magistrate was dealing with the matter without fairness and that he had any biases against the actress.
Among other grounds, Kangana’s lawyer had submitted that on two occasions, the magistrate threatened in the presence of media, to issue an arrest warrant against her to secure her appearance before the court. Her lawyer added that the “open threats” had been captured by various media personnel on both the occasions while the court had noted it in the roznama only once. The court explained that it was a general practice for the court to sometimes give oral directions but they don’t mean threats.
The court also rejected Kangana’s plea to transfer her counter-complaint against Javed Akhtar, to another magistrate. In sum, the court reasoned, “In absence of any material demonstrating the apprehension that justice will not be done, without any bias, such application for transfer cannot be entertained. Therefore, while assurance of fair trial needs to be respected, plea for transfer of case should not be entertained on mere apprehension.”
Javed Akhtar had filed a defamation complaint against Kangana after her interview was telecast on electronic media, in which she accused Javed Akhtar of issuing her threats and referred to him as part of “Bollywood mafia”.