The Court remarked that both Moitra and Dehadrai have brought the public discourse to a fairly low level.
“The allegations which are made against you do not impute any stand one way or the other as to the correctness of the allegation which you made against her. Even without those words [calling Dehadrai jilted lover, lunatic etc], she could have taken whatever defence she could. As I see it at this stage, she would have to defend herself in the public domain if your allegations are in the public domain. It would perhaps be a different thing if your allegations were made only to the statutory authorities.”
It noted that the correctness of the allegations made by Dehadrai would have to be determined at trial.
Justice Jalan then said that the Parliamentary Ethics Committee report against Moitra is not binding on the Court.
“The Ethics Committee is not a judicial proceeding. The correctness of the Ethics Committee is not binding on this Court. It is for the Court to decide whether the allegations are true or not. She has taken the defence of justification,” the Bench said.
The Bench further remarked that as far as Moitra’s statements that Dehadrai’s actions are motivated are concerned, it is her perception and it is difficult to show any proof for that.
“It is her perception that you are motivated. What proof would she be able to give or would you be able to give one way or the other?”
Source: Barandbench
