Defamation complaint filed against TMC MP Mahua Moitra

TMC, Member of Parliament Mahua Moitra had filed a criminal complaint for defamation at the Patiala House Court against Sudhir Chaudhary on 08.07.2019, for falsely accusing her of plagiarism in her maiden speech at the Parliament.
Sh. Sudhir Chaudhary through his counsel sh. Vijay Aggarwal and Ayush Jindal has now filed an Application under section 340 CrPC R/
w Section 195 CrPC (perjury) on the ground that the Complaint filed by Ms. Mahua Moitra was filed on the basis of falsehood/concealment of relevant material information from the Court. 
In case the said Application, where, various sections from the Indian Penal Code are invoked, is allowed, then after trial, Ms. Mahua Moitra can be convicted for a term of upto 7 years imprisonment.
The ground under which the said Application has been filed by Sh. Sudhir Chaudhary through Mr. Aggarwal are as under:
a. That Mahua Moitra has wilfully concealed that a breach of privilege motion is pending for consideration before the Parliament
b. The statements made by Mahua Moitra in the past also have had striking resemblance to the statements made by others, ie, on one occasion, Ms. Mahua Moitra in a talk show with a leading journalist narrated a story as her own experience, which story had a striking resemblance to a joke narrated by a stand up comedian Sh. Kunal Kamra.
c. Mahua Moitra has claimed that the 7 signs were taken by her from a poster put up on the main lobby at the united states holocaust memorial museum in 2017, however, as per reports, no such poster was put up at the main lobby of the said museum
d. Mahua Moitra has failed to identify the author of the signs in her speech at the beginning of her speech which was done during her speech while citing other authors of poems and quotations
e. Mahua Moitra has played fraud upon this court by concealing that her entire speech was aired by the applicant on 04.07.2019 at the same prime time hour, giving her entire version
f. That Mahua Moitra has failed to point out that the provision of section 202 crpc must be observed in the present complaint as held in abhijit pawar vs. Hemat madhukar nianr mbalkar & anr. 2017 (3) scc 528, in view of the fact that the applicant is a resident beyond the jurisdiction of this hon’ble court

News in the domain of Advertising, Marketing, Media and Business of Entertainment

More in Media