Ranaut’s counsel Rizwan Siddique informed a bench of Justices SS Shinde and Manish Pitale that the actor had not dedicated any flawed by means of her tweets.
He mentioned the Justice of the Peace’s courtroom in suburban Bandra had erred in permitting registration of a First Information Report (FIR) towards Ranaut on costs together with sedition.
Siddique urged the High Court to quash the decrease courtroom’s order in addition to the FIR.
“There is absolute non-application of mind in the (Bandra) court’s order. Even the sections invoked against me do not constitute any offence. None of my tweets have invoked any reactions from the public. They will not attract a punishment as they were not followed by violence. What happened after the tweet? Was there any criminal act after my tweets?” Siddique informed the HC on the behalf of Ranaut.
The actor and her sister Rangoli had challenged the order of the Justice of the Peace’s courtroom to provoke legal proceedings towards them and the next summons issued by the Mumbai Police.
The FIR was registered towards Ranaut and Rangoli in October final yr on the instructions of the Justice of the Peace’s courtroom after Munawwar Ali Sayyad, a casting director and health coach, filed a grievance citing some tweets and statements made allegedly by Ranaut and her sister.
In an affidavit filed within the HC earlier this month, Sayyad had mentioned that amongst different issues, Ranaut and Rangoli promoted “hatred and contempt, and incited disaffection towards the Maharashtra government,” by means of their tweets.
He mentioned within the affidavit that the Justice of the Peace’s courtroom was subsequently, justified in directing the police to provoke proceedings and invoke the offence of sedition below Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code towards them.
In his grievance to the Justice of the Peace courtroom, Sayyed had alleged that Ranaut, by means of her tweets and tv interviews, had constantly defamed Hindi movie business by portraying Bollywood as a hub of nepotism, favouritism, drug addicts, communally-biased individuals and murderers, and so on.
He mentioned Ranaut and Rangoli had additionally repeatedly promoted enmity between communities by means of their remarks.
However, Ranaut’s counsel Siddique on Monday denied these allegations.
He informed the HC that the Bandra courtroom had did not comply with due process and did not apply its thoughts in allowing the police to provoke motion towards Ranaut and her sister.
Earlier final month, Sayyad had additionally filed an utility searching for initiation of contempt proceedings towards Ranaut for allegedly breaching a earlier endeavor she had given to the HC.
He mentioned in his plea that on November 24, Ranaut had given an endeavor that she won’t make statements pertaining to the Mumbai Police’s investigation into the sedition case filed towards her.
However, on January 8, simply earlier than she went to the police station, Ranaut tweeted a video through which she spoke to her followers concerning the investigation, Sayyad had mentioned.
The HC is listening to Ranaut’s plea towards the Bandra courtroom and Sayyad’s contempt utility collectively.