Kangana Ranaut moves Sessions Court in a defamation case filed by Javed Akhtar
A lower court had rejected her transfer petition after which she moved a Sessions Count in Mumbai on Monday.
In the Javed Akhtar versus Kangana Ranaut case, the Bollywood actor has moved a sessions court in Mumbai against a lower court that dismissed her plea to seek transfer of complaint against Akhtar. The application was filed on Monday. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM), in October last year, had rejected her application seeking transfer of the case from the Andheri magistrate's court.
Kangana Ranaut’s application was filed by advocate Rizwan Siddiquee before the Borivali sessions court. Ranaut’s application said that the offence initiated against her was "non-cognizable, bailable and compoundable". Kangana Ranaut’s application will be heard on January Thursday by Additional Sessions Judge Shridhar Bhosle.
Previously in her transfer plea before the CMM, Kangana Ranaut has said that she had "lost faith" in the Andheri metropolitan magistrate's court. The application said that the court indirectly "threatened" to issue a warrant against her if the actor failed to appear before the court in a bailable offence.
Javed Akhtar filed a defamation suit against Kangana Ranaut in November 2020 before the Andheri court for her statements made during an interview with Republic TV’s Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami.
Kangana Ranaut, in her cross-criminal complaint against Javed Akhtar, alleged him of criminal conspiracy and outraging modesty by invading her privacy. She further sought a case against the lyricist under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Court (IPC).
This is not the first time that Kangana Ranaut has challenged the rejection of her transfer petition. Previously, she sought a transfer application from Andheri Magistrate to some other Magistrate. However, the CMM at Esplanade rejected the plea.
Kangana Ranaut has a number of complaints filed against her including one for her controversial statements on India’s independence in 1947. Other than this, she also has cases against her for her remarks on the farmer’s protest as well as for ‘Khalistan’ remarks that had upset the Sikh community.