COURT ACQUITS PRIYA RAMANI IN DEFAMATION CASE FILED BY MJ AKBAR
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Wednesday acquitted journalist Priya Ramani in a criminal defamation case filed by former Union minister MJ Akbar after she accused him of sexual misbehaviour during a work interview in December 1993, and emphasised in its judgment that the right to protect one’s reputation cannot be at the cost of a woman’s right to dignity.
The court pointed out that even a person of high social standing can be a sexual harasser. “The woman has a right to put her grievance at any platform of her choice and even after decades,” additional chief metropolitan magistrate Ravinder Dubey said.
The judge accepted the argument by Ramani’s lawyer that the complainant was not a man of stellar reputation on the basis of the testimonies put forward by Ramani and her witnesses.
Shortly after the verdict, Ramani said it would “encourage more women to speak up”. Akbar’s lawyers said that they would comment only after studying the judgment.
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Wednesday acquitted journalist Priya Ramani in a criminal defamation case filed by former Union minister MJ Akbar after she accused him of sexual misbehaviour during a work interview in December 1993, and emphasised in its judgment that the right to protect one’s reputation cannot be at the cost of a woman’s right to dignity.
The court pointed out that even a person of high social standing can be a sexual harasser, and that a woman cannot be punished for raising instances of abuse.
“The right of reputation cannot be protected at the cost of the right of life and dignity of woman as guaranteed in Indian Constitution under Article 21, and right of equality before law and equal protection of law as guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution,” additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM) Ravinder Dubey said.
“The woman has a right to put her grievance at any platform of her choice and even after decades,” the judgment stated.
Shortly after the verdict, delivered at Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court, Ramani said it would
“encourage more women to speak up”. Her lawyer Rebecca John said that the “path-breaking judgment” had upheld that “no truth is exempted from the purview of defamation; it has to be made for public good and in public interest.”
Akbar’s lawyers said that they would comment only after studying the judgment.
In October 2018, Ramani shared an article on Twitter which she had written in 2017 in Vogue India magazine following allegations of sexual assault and misconduct against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein made by several women as part of the Me Too movement in the United States. The article did not name MJ Akbar — it described her experience of an interview with a newspaper editor for a reporter’s position — but the Tweet did.
Akbar, who was a minister in the Bjp-led cabinet at the time resigned shortly after a host of women, besides Ramani, made allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment against him in the wake of the Me Too movement.
He, however, filed a criminal defamation suit under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), arguing that the incident was not as she described it in her article. He also said that a tweet by Ramani describing him as a “predator” had caused irreparable damage to his reputation.
Akbar’s lawyer Geeta Luthra argued that Ramani’s statements on Twitter were “per se defamatory” and questioned her decision to speak up several years after the purported incident. Luthra had pointed out that Ramani had no evidence in the form of CCTV footage or phone records to back her claim.
But the court, in its verdict, recognised that no legal remedies were available to Ramani when she was sexually harassed — the Vishaka Guidelines against sexual harassment, the Sexual Harassment of the Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act and Section 354 A which made sexual harassment a criminal offence, only came up in the subsequent years — and that many women opt not to complain even now due to the fear of stigma.
“Most of the women who suffer abuse do not speak up about it for the simple reason of the shame or stigma attached with the sexual harassment. The sexual abuse, if committed against woman, takes away her dignity and her self confidence,” ACMM Dubey said.
The judge accepted John’s argument put that the complainant MJ Akbar was not a man of “stellar reputation” on the basis of the testimonies put forward by Ramani and her witnesses, journalists Ghazala Wahab and Niloufer Venkatraman. Wahab had also levelled charges of sexual harassment against Akbar.
“The court said I believe Priya Ramani, and I believe her truth… Not every truth is exempted from the purview of defamation. It has to be made for public good and in public interest. Given that sexual harassment at the workplace is one such truth, it was a defence we took and which the court upheld,” John said.
“This is an exceedingly significant judgment , which also recognises that safety at the workplace is an extremely important feature for any woman and that it is part of the fundamental right to life and livelihood,” advocate Mrunalini Deshmukh said.
“However, as much as we must hail the victory as upholding women’s dignity it also puts a lot of responsibility on women to ensure that the law is followed and not abused,” she said.
NEW DELHI: The health ministry on Wednesday issued new guidelines for international arrival amid the spread of mutant variants of Covid-19, saying the latest rules will come into effect from 23:59 hours on February 22 and will be in force till further orders.
On Tuesday, the ministry had informed that the South African variant was detected in four travelers returning from Africa and the Brazilian strain was found in a returnee from Brazil.
“In the context of Covid-19, Government of India is following point of entry procedures for identifying international travellers, particularly at-risk travellers to India through multi-pronged strategy of thermal screening and testing,” the health ministry said in its updated guidelines.
“There is increasing evidence that the mutant variant of SARS-COV-2 are in circulation in many countries and these mutant variants are driving the pandemic in their country of origin.
So far, the three SARS-COV-2 variants in circulation viz-a-viz (i) UK variant (ii) South Africa variant and (iii) Brazil variant, have been detected in 86, 44 and 15 countries, respectively,” it added.
According to the guidelines, all international travellers, except those coming on flights originating from the United Kingdom, Europe and Middle East, will require to submit a self-declaration form on the online Air Suvidha portal along with a negative Covid-19 RT-PCR report prior to travel.
“This test should have been conducted within 72 hours prior to undertaking the journey. Each passenger shall also submit a declaration with respect to authenticity of the report and will be liable for criminal prosecution, if found otherwise,” the guidelines read.
Besides this, passengers will also require to submit an undertaking on the portal or otherwise to the aviation ministry through concerned airlines before undertaking the journey that they would abide by the decision of the appropriate government authority to undergo home quarantine/ selfmonitoring of their health for 14 days, or as warranted.
Arrival in India without a Covid negative report will only be allowed to those travelling in the exigency of death in the family, the guidelines read.