17 C
Sunday, December 5, 2021
HomeIndiaSameer Wankhede’s father challenges HC order that refused to restrain Malik from...

Sameer Wankhede’s father challenges HC order that refused to restrain Malik from commenting towards NCB officer

Mumbai NCB chief Sameer Wankhede’s father Dnyandev Wankhede on Wednesday challenged earlier than the division bench of the Bombay Excessive Court docket the order of its single-judge bench that had refused to restrain Maharashtra Minister Nawab Malik from making feedback and placing social media posts towards the anti-drug company officer and his household.

In his attraction talked about earlier than a division bench led by Justice S.J. Kathawala, Dnyandev Wankhede contended that because the single-judge bench had held that Mr. Malik’s statements towards Sameer Wankhede had stemmed out of malice, the Minister ought to have been restrained from persevering with making defamatory feedback towards him and his household.

He requested the division bench that pending the ultimate disposal of his attraction, the Excessive Court docket move an order of short-term injunction restraining Mr. Malik and his brokers from making any defamatory feedback towards the Wankhedes.

On Monday, a single-judge bench of Justice Madhav Jamdar had refused to grant the Wankhede senior any interim reduction in his defamation swimsuit filed towards Mr. Malik, a frontrunner of Maharashtra’s ruling social gathering NCP.

Mr. Malik has been elevating a slew of allegations towards Sameer Wankhede after the Mumbai NCB crew allegedly seized medicine from a cruise ship earlier final month.

Difficult the November 22 order, Dnyandev Wankhede mentioned the single-judge bench had been mistaken in denying him interim reduction in his defamation swimsuit filed towards Nawab Malik.

In his attraction talked about earlier than the division bench, Dnyandev Wankhede mentioned that the attraction was being filed solely to a restricted extent as he was aggrieved and dissatisfied by the findings recorded by the single-judge bench in its order.

“The prayer for injunction was rejected under the impression that the plaintiff was seeking the same in a blanket manner which was not the case,” the attraction reads.

He mentioned that the interviews given to information channels, and statements and social media posts and so forth., made by Mr. Malik towards the Wankhedes have been “highly defamatory, and libellous” as the identical contained “incorrect facts, innuendos, and conclusions.” They have been a “deliberate attempt on Mr. Malik’s part to knowingly and maliciously defame” him, his son Sameer, and his household, Dnyandev Wankhede mentioned within the attraction.

Mr. Malik’s statements not simply induced an irreparable loss to his and his members of the family’ status but in addition breached their proper to dwell with their dignity intact.

He mentioned the single-judge bench failed to understand that apart from Sameer Wankhede, nobody within the household is a public official, and due to this fact, their lives weren’t up for public scrutiny.

The attraction claims that after concluding that Malik’s statements and social media posts had been actuated by malice and animosity, the bench should not have denied reduction to Dnyandev Wankhede.

Regardless of noting that Mr. Malik had made statements with out verifying them first, the Excessive Court docket “should not have granted him a free reign to continue his tweets etc”, the attraction mentioned.

Dnyandev Wankhhede additional contended that the single-judge bench’s conclusion that accusations couldn’t be thought-about as completely false was mistaken because it had itself held that they have been made with out due verification.

His attraction is prone to be heard by the division bench on Thursday.

In his interim software looking for such reduction from the single-judge bench, Dnyandev Wankhede had cited Mr. Malik’s tweets and public statements wherein the latter had alleged amongst different issues, that Sameer Wankhede was born a Muslim however had falsely claimed that he belonged to a chosen scheduled caste to safe his central authorities job.

Sameer Wankhede had denied all of the allegations.

The Wankhede senior had sought an interim reduction that Mr. Malik ought to be prohibited from making any defamatory statements or tweets, social media posts and so forth. towards him, Sameer Wankhede, or any of their members of the family.

Justice Jamdar, nonetheless, had held that imposing such a blanket prohibition upon Mr. Malik was not attainable within the current case.

The one-judge bench had held that although it appeared obvious that Mr. Malik’s statements and tweets towards the NCB officer had actuated out of malice and animosity, the allegations the minister had made towards Sameer Wankhede didn’t appear prima facie (on the face of it) to be fully false.

The bench, nonetheless, had additionally mentioned that the State Minister had made a number of such statements earlier than verifying information and had directed Mr. Malik to henceforth make public statements or feedback towards Mr. Wankhede and his household solely after an inexpensive verification of information.

Supply hyperlink



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -

Most Popular