In twin separate developments linked to mid-sea drug bust case, the Bombay High Court on Monday directed Maharashtra Minister Nawab Malik to file his reply on a Rs 1.25 crore defamation suit filed against him by Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) Zonal Director Sameer Wankhede’s father Dnyandev Wankhede and the Mazgaon Metropolitan Magistrate’s court issued a process against section 500 of IPC for alleged defamation in a case filed against him by BJP leader Mohit Kamboj.
On a day when he upped the ante over the alleged involvement of Wankhede’s sister Harshada Dinanath Redkar involved in the drug business, Malik found himself in a spot of bother as he came to contend with two defamation cases filed against him --- one filed in the high court by Sameer Wankhede’s father Dnyandev Wankhede and another in the Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Mazgaon.
Advocate Arshad Shaikh, who appeared for Dnyandev Wankhede, rooted for the high court restraining Malik from making “defamatory” statements against NCB’s zonal director and his client’s son Sameer till the high court heard. “Everyday something or the other is posted hence I am here. This morning only Malik put a tweet about Sameer Wankhede’s sister-in-law," Shaikh told the court.
Senior Advocate Atul Damle, representing Malik, told the court that he had no instructions from his client to make any statements or give undertaking in court. He also opposed the maintainability of the suit filed by Dnyandev on behalf of his son Sameer. He sought two to three days’ time for his client to file his reply.
Vacation judge Madhav Jamdar directed Malik to file a reply by Tuesday in view of the fact that the suit was against defamatory statements made against the petitioner’s family members. "If you can give reply on Twitter then you better reply here also," Justice Jamdar told Damle, before passing the order asking Malik to file his reply on Tuesday.
In a Rs 1.25 crore defamation suit filed on behalf of Dnyandev Wankhede, Advocates Divakar Rai and Saurabh Tamhankar told the court: “Defendants have caused irreparable loss, damage, harm, prejudice to the name, character, reputation and societal image of Plaintiff and his family members”.
Dnyandev Wankhede filed the suit in the high court after Malik shared Sameer Wankhede’s purported birth certificate on his twitter handle which allegedly stated that the latter’s father was a Muslim.
The petitioner alleged that Malik had unleashed a “tirade” against his son after the NCB arrested his son-in-law Sameer Khan under NDPS in January this year.
The petitioner among other things urged the high court: to declare the statements made by Malik are "tortious and defamatory in nature", to pass permanent injection order restraining Malik from publishing or making statements in any kind of media, including his social media accounts and to delete any statements, press releases, tweets released by Malik.
Meanwhile, Metropolitan Magistrate, Mazgaon, P L Mokashi – after hearing a complaint filed by BJP leader Mohit Kamboj -- ordered that process be issued against Malik under section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of IPC vide section 204 (a) of Criminal Pr0cedure Code for his defamatory statement against him.
In his complaint, Kamboj quoted Malik as having alleged NCB’s zonal director Sameer Wankhede had let go of Kamboj's brother-in-law, Rishabh Sachdeva, because of the BJP leader's influence. Rishabh was reportedly onboard when the NCB had raided the cruise ship on October 2.
Earlier on October 9, Kamboj had issued a notice to Nawab Malik, in which he had asked the Maharashtra minister to desist from making defamatory statements.” However, Malik repeated the allegations on October 11. On that very day, Kamboj sent another notice to Malik, asking him to prove what he had stated or else cease from making such claims,” Kambij stated in his complaint.
On October 26, Kamboj filed a criminal complaint before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate at Mazgaon seeking an order to issue process under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
"It is a matter of great shame that an elected representative of the people, a sitting cabinet minister has misused his official post to seek vengeance against the investigating officer who had arrested his son-in-law regards a narcotics case. In doing so Mr. Malik concocted a fictitious story to show an indulgence on the part of said investigating officer towards the brother-in-law of our client during the Cordelia cruise raid,” Kamboj’s lawyer Faiz Merchant had argued before the court.
"Malik even went to the extent of claiming to release a video of my client with said Investigating officer; which despite our repeated requests to Mr. Malik never saw the light of day. Obviously since it does not exist,” Merchant told the court alluding to allegations made by Malik at news conference.
“Malik has maligned the name and image of my client and defamed him during the press conferences held by him. There is not even an iota of truth in the allegations levelled against my client by Malik. He has also displayed pictures of my client and his entire family in the press conferences and has maligned the image and lowered the esteem and reputation of my client in the public at large. Needless to mention that since this was telecast on national television the message to debase my client image and repute has reached the public at large".