[Live Updates] MJ Akbar's Defamation Case Against Journalist Priya Ramani

Wahab informs the court that once when she was working on her computer, she saw Akbar staring at her. He used to keep the door of his open, only shutting them during meetings. He also started sending her private messages through Intranet Messaging Service

In 1996, when I was promoted as Sub-Chief Editor, I was reporting directly to Akbar. My desk was placed in such a way, that Akbar could easily see me from his office even when the door was only slightly ajar: Wahab

Wahab says in the middle of 1996, office of Asian Age shifted from KG Marg to Tolstoy Marg, as the former was under renovation. After renovation, only Akbar's office, Bureau and Features Office was placed on the 2nd Floor

Wahab says in the middle of 1996, office of Asian Age shifted from KG Marg to Tolstoy Marg, as the former was under renovation. After renovation, only Akbar's office, Bureau and Features Office was placed on the 2nd Floor

Judge records that Luthra can't assume, even prior to the statement being made, that the same is not relevant to the case

Wahab informs the court that when she joined Asian Age, she was reporting to Mr Mittal. Later she was transferred to the features section, where she was reporting to Poonam Saxena

Luthra wants Wahab's chief examination to take place in a question-answer form, with accommodation of her objections under sec 6 being recorded

Judge: Objection overruled. There can't be any curtailment on defence conducting examination to establish its case

John tells the court that Luthra can't dictate her as to how to examine the witnesses. She wants Wahab to share her statements uninterrupted

Judge tells Luthra that it's defence's prerogative to establish her case

John cites various judgments which had allowed the accused persons to share their stories to establish their defence of truth, even if they included statements that show complainant's reputation at the lowest ebb

John argues that Prosecution witnesses were allowed to make sweeping statements celebrating the reputation of Akbar. Now, defence witnesses can't be allowed to share their stories to establish their truth?

Rebecca John reads out definition of defamation under IPC, which lists truth as a defence.

Akbar has repeatedly cited damage to his reputation as a fact in his complaint. Therefore, examining of witness becomes imperative to establish that defence