Actor Nora Fatehi files defamation complaint against Jacqueline Fernandez before Delhi court
New Delhi, Dec 12: Actor Nora Fatehi on Monday filed a criminal complaint against Jacqueline Fernandez before a Delhi court for allegedly defaming her by "unfairly dragging" her name into a Rs 200 crore money laundering case involving 'conman' Sukesh Chandrashekar, her lawyer said.
Fatehi, a Canadian citizen, also arrayed 15 media organisations as accused in her complaint, which is likely to come up for hearing on December 19, advocate Vikram Chauhan said.
"The complainant has a pristine reputation apart from a rapidly progressing career which has quite obviously threatened her rivals who are unable to compete with her on fair footing," the complaint said.
The defamatory statement was made by Fernandez in "bad faith" and with "mala fide intention" and was circulated by the media houses made accused in the complaint with an intent to defame her, the counsel said.
The complaint claimed the allegations made by Fernandez, also a Bollywood actor, that Fatehi had received gifts from Chandrashekhar were wrong.
"The only time the complainant spoke to Chandrashekhar was when his wife, Leena Maria Paul, made her speak to him over speakerphone at the event in Chennai where the complainant was invited by Leena. At the event, the complainant was gifted an iPhone and a Gucci bag by Leena. No gifts were ever received by the complainant from Chandrashekhar," Fatehi has said in the complaint.
Fatehi also denied she had received a luxury car from Chandrashekhar and said it was part payment to her brother-in-law Bobby Khan, who Chandrashekhar had approached for directing a movie.
"Since the complainant had never even spoken to Chandrashekhar let alone having met him, hence the imputation made by the Fernandez and the subsequent publishing of the same by the accused media houses are untrue," the complaint said.
Earlier today, a court here adjourned for December 20 the hearing against Fernandez and Chandrashekhar in the money laundering case.
Fernandez appeared before the court during the brief hearing.
The court had on November 15 granted regular bail to Fernandez, who has never been arrested in the case.
The court had on August 31 taken cognisance of a supplementary charge sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate and asked Fernandez to appear before it.
Fernandez, who was summoned by the ED several times in connection with the investigation, has been named as an accused in the supplementary charge sheet.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Karnataka Assembly passes bill on Palace Grounds amid opposition protest
Bengaluru, Mar 6 (PTI): The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed the Bangalore Palace (Utilisation and Regulation of Land) Bill, reaffirming state ownership over 472 acres and 16 guntas of land here, amid protests by the opposition BJP.
During the discussion, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government would have to provide Rs 200 crore worth of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) for each acre of land, which means that for 15 acres, Rs 3,000 crore worth of TDR would be issued.
“If we accept it, then this 2-km stretch of road will become the costliest road in the world. If we accept it then how are we going to develop the city in later stages? How will you carry out development works?” asked Patil.
He also pointed out that this question was raised not only under the Congress government but also during the previous BJP regime.
However, the BJP-led cabinet has opposed the project.
ALSO READ: Budget session: Law Min. HK Patil introduces Microfinance bill in Karnataka assembly
“Suppose we agree to it then, what will be the valuation of the 472 acres? It will be lakhs and lakhs of crores of rupees. Can we accept?” Patil wondered.
The Minister said the government had previously exercised its executive powers to issue an ordinance, which was approved by the Governor. Now the government is bringing a bill with two amendments.
“In this bill, we have made provisions either to develop or drop the road development work,” Patil explained.
However, BJP state president B Y Vijayendra and BJP MLA Arvind Bellad opposed the move, alleging that the government was targetting Yaduveer Krishna Datta Chamaraja Wadiyar, the scion of the Mysuru royal family, and the BJP MP from Mysuru-Kodagu constituency out of political vendetta.
“We talk of 472 acres of Mysuru Maharaja but here there are many Maharajas who too own 400 acres, 500 acres and thousands of acres of land, which is known to everyone,” Bellad said.
He slammed the Congress government, saying political power should not be misused for personal vendetta.
“Why (the then Deputy Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah brought the law in 1996 pertaining to the Bangalore Palace? Why are you setting eyes on the Bangalore Palace?” he asked.
Vijayendra charged that Wadiyar won the election on BJP ticket so the state government realised that it should acquire it.
“This bill has been brought for political vengeance. We are not discussing whether Rs 3,000 crore is exorbitant or not but the moment Yaduveer became MP, the state government woke up. You should be ashamed. This house should not be used for political vendetta,” he said.
Intervening, Minister Priyank Kharge said Vijayendra should not have raised it because the intention behind building the road was noble.
According to him, the BJP too had the same plan when it was in power.
He sought to know whether thousands of crores of rupees be spent on a road which should have cost significantly less.
In response, BJP MLA B A Basavaraj (Byrathi) said issuing TDR will not be a burden on the state government and appealed to the ruling Congress to reconsider its stance.
Minister Ramalinga Reddy too explained that the Karnataka government acquired the entire land way back in 1996.
The Mysuru royal family went to the High Court, which gave ruling in favour of the state government. The royal family then approached the Supreme Court, where the case is still going on, the Minister pointed out.
“The final judgment is pending in the SC to decide whether the acquisition was right or wrong. If the SC says it’s the royal family’s property then let it be so. If the order is in the state government’s favour then we can take a decision. The bill is only about it,” Reddy explained.
Speaker U T Khader then called for a voice vote and the bill was passed by the Assembly amidst opposition BJP’s discontent.
