In the case titled Kamaal Rashid Khan v Manoj Bajpayee, the Apex Court had on Wednesday rejected a plea brought up by Actor and Producer Kamaal R. Khan. He in his plea sought for transfer of the defamation case from Indore to Mumbai, registered against him by Actor Manoj Bajpayee.
A bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Dipankar Datta expressed it saw no justification to acknowledge such a plea.
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the respondent and perused the petition papers as also the reply filed to the transfer petition along with the documents enclosed. Considering that the complaint has been initiated at a place where it is alleged that the complainant had knowledge of the defamatory tweets, we see no reason to accept the request for transfer,” the Court declared.
Accordingly, the bench tossed out the transfer petition proceeded by Khan.
Background of the case:
Actor Manoj Bajpayee had registered the lawsuit after Khan designated him a charsi/ganjedi (drug addict) in his tweets in 2021.
Khan progressed to the Supreme Court requesting that the lawsuit pending before a court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Indore in Madhya Pradesh be handed over to the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Mumbai in Maharashtra.
Single-judge Justice Aravind Kumar had last month allotted notice in the case, and instructed Bajpayee to file his response within two weeks.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on December 13, 2022 had disregarded Khan’s plea requesting for subduing of the lawsuit against him.
Indore court, last month had also administered a detention warrant against Khan, as per media declarations.
This had facilitated Khan to proceed to the Supreme Court.
During the last hearing, counsel denoting Khan had indicated out that since both parties were living in Mumbai, the Indore court had no jurisdiction.
Counsel for Bajpayee notified that the whole cause of action materialized in Indore, the witnesses who have deposed before the magistrate are inhabitants of Indore, and the impact of the tweets was felt throughout the nation comprising Indore.
Consequently, Bajpayee asserted that Khan did not approach the Court with clean hands, having concealed the fact that the plea of jurisdiction transfer had already been overruled by the High Court.
It had been additionally contended that the magistrate had already departed a reasoned verdict after admitting cognizance of the lawsuit, and pleased himself with the part of jurisdiction and comfort of parties.
Bajpayee’s advocate emphasized that Khan is a regular lawbreaker for publicizing defamatory matter against distinct luminaries, and has been charged for such declarations by various courts.
On the other hand, counsel for Khan then asked for an interim stay on the detention warrants handed out by the Indore court, which was denied.
Senior Advocate Brijender Chahar and advocates Kamal Pundir, Durgesh Gupta, Anil Kumar Sharma, Vinod Kumar Tewari, Priya, Shivani, and Amit Kumar denoted Khan.
Advocates Mayank Kshirsagar, Paresh Joshi, Abha Goel, Rashmi Joshi, Pankhuri, and Akhilesh Yadav appeared for Bajpayee.
Written by Sonakshi Misra, 2nd year (4th semester) B.A.LL.B. Hons. student at Atal Bihari Vajpayee School of Legal Studies, Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur.
