Akbar To Wait His Appeal, Delhi High Court Adjourns Plea

Former Union Minister MJ Akbar appealed to Delhi HC against the acquittal of journalist Priya Ramani in his criminal defamation case, which was filed by Akbar after Ramani levelled sexual harassment allegations against him during the #MeToo movement of 2018.

Additional CMM Ravindra Kumar Pandey had acquitted Ramani after a trial of almost two years simply on the basis that possibility of the alleged complaint could not be ruled out.

As per the court, “Right to Dignity” should prevail over “Right of Reputation” and the victim needs protection before the complainant.

It was claimed by Ramani that MJ Akbar had sexually harassed her, when she was called for a job interview.

The Court had taken note of systemic abuse at the workplace and highlighted that the Vishaka Guidelines on sexual harassment at the workplace put forth by the Supreme Court in 1997 were not in effect at the time of the incident.

It is however ironic to say that the mere statement of Ramani was accepted by Add CMM to conclude that Akbar was not a man of stellar reputation. The question therefore arises that when we talk of gender equality in every sphere, why is it that a mere statement of male is not sufficient to lodge complaint against female, whereas the same is not the case in vice versa situation?

It is true that many cases pop out after the #Metoo movement, where the allegations in some cases had been proved to be correct. However, when it comes to justice, precedent value should not act as binding precedent and the matter should be decided on a factual and evidential basis.

When it is stated by the Court that a woman had a right to put her grievance at any platform of her choice and even after decades, where will the Men go?

Or, can it be pleaded that such perspective will amount to violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution? However, it is better to wait for the Birbal before framing any opinion.

Case Title: MJ Akbar v. Priya Ramani