The Mazgaon Metropolitan Magistrate court in Mumbai on Monday issued a bailable warrant against Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut in a defamation complaint filed by BJP leader Kirit Somaiya’s wife, Medha Somaiya.
The court had earlier issued a summons against Raut directing him to appear before it on July 4. However, Raut was in Delhi and did not appear before the court.
Advocate Vivekanand Gupta appearing for Somaiya told the court that after the last hearing, the summons that was issued was served to Raut on June 11 itself and he himself had received it. In spite of that, he is not here and neither was he represented.
After this, the court issued a bailable warrant of Rs 5,000 against Raut under Section 70 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
ALSO READ | BJP’s Kirit Somaiya moves Bombay HC, seeks CBI probe in ‘attack’ on him
Somaiya, in her complaint through her lawyer, Gupta, had claimed that Raut had made baseless and completely defamatory allegations against her and her husband, accusing them of being involved in a scam worth Rs 100 crore over the construction and maintenance of some public toilets under the jurisdiction of the Mira Bhayander Municipal Corporation.
Medha, who is a professor of Organic Chemistry at Ruia College in Mumbai, has sought action against Raut under sections 499 (makes or publishes any imputation) and 500 (defamation) for his allegations of a Rs 100 crore toilet scam carried out by her and her NGO Yuva Pratishthan.
The complaint stated that on April 15, 2022, and thereafter, Raut had made malicious and unwarranted mischievous statements in the media against her and the same was printed, published, and circulated to the general public at large through electronic and print media. The said malicious statements were also viral on social media platforms on the same day and were read and heard by the public at large, said the complaint.
Gupta urged the court to issue a process or a notice to Raut and begin proceedings against him on the charges of defamation. It was only after hearing Gupta at length that the court issued the summons.