Madras High Court Restrains Leena Manimekalai & Susi Ganesan From Going To Press On #MeToo Case

The Madras High Court on Thursday passed an interim injunction to restrain filmmaker and poet, Leena Manimekalai and film producer Susi Ganesan from going to the press or making social media comments regarding their respective contentions in the defamation suit filed by the latter over the #MeToo sexual harassment allegations raised by the former. Susi Ganesan had earlier filed a criminal defamation case against Manimekalai. Now, he has filed a civil defamation suit in the High Court, in which he sought an interim restraint on Manimekalai's public statements against him.A single-judge bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose, after considering the contentions put forward by Susi Ganesan, came to the conclusion that a prima facie case has been made out for the grant of interim injunction against Manimekalai as prayed for in the plaint. Along with Leena Manimekalai, singer Chinamaye Sripada, Twitter Communications India Private Limited, Google LLC, Meta Inc (Formerly Facebook Inc), The Editor in Chief The News Minute Dhanya Rajendran and Dhivya Marunthiah alias Dhivem have also been arraigned as respondents in the suit. The Court issued the restraint order against Manimekalai and other respondents from making public statements against Ganesan.While granting the interim injunction, the court noted that the balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff and that irreparable injury will ensue if the allegations against the plaintiff in the #MeToo Movement is proved wrong in the trial."...Irreparable injury will be caused to the plaintiff, if after Trial, this Court finds that there is no truth in the statements made by the defendants. Accordingly, there shall be an order of interim injunction as prayed for in O.A. No.16 of 2022. However, it is made clear that since the matter is subjudice, the applicant and the first defendant (Manimekalai), who has accused the applicant/ plaintiff of sexual harassment, are injuncted from going to the press with regard to the subject matter of the dispute in C.S. No.7 of 2022. Both the plaintiff and the first defendant are directed not to go to the media or tweet messages with regard to their respective contentions as the matter is subjudice", the court noted in its order.Susi Ganesan filed the civil suit seeking for damages and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from making defamatory statements against the plaintiff. The plaintiff also submitted that he had previously filed a criminal defamation complaint under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, which has been pending before the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. In the current application, the applicant primarily alleged that Manimekalai, in connivance with singer Chinmaye Sripada who has accused the lyricist Vairamuthu Ramasamy of sexual harassment, posted a tweet that was defamatory enough to negatively impact the career prospects of the plaintiff as a reputed filmmaker. He submitted that the said tweet accused him and his wife of threatening Actress Amala Paul for outing his alleged predatory behaviour. Susi Ganesan also contended that the said tweet was re-tweeted by Chinmaye Sripada, Dhanya Rajendran and Dhivya Maruntaih, along with many others.According to the tweet posted by Manimekalai that Susi Ganesan refers to, the Director has also threatened Actor Siddharth for supporting Manimekalai's #MeToo Tweet. Manimekalai further recounted her harrowing experiences surrounding the Passport Impounding issue.According to the applicant/ plaintiff, the statements made by Manimekalai on the public platforms are highly defamatory, absolutely false and intended to tarnish the reputation of the former. Sharing screenshots of the allegedly defamatory statements made by Manimekalai along with other documents filed with the plaint, the petitioner tried to convince the court that the already published statements hosted in the Internet Platforms of Meta INC, Google LLC, Twitter as well as by Divya Maruntaih have affected his reputation and even spoiled his image with the music director, Mr.Ilaiyaraja, who has inducted the plaintiff for his next film.The plaintiff also pointed out that several tweets are being reproduced in the line of alleged defamatory statements made by Manimekalai which has stooped down his reputation. He also submitted that Manimekalai had given an interview in the news channel of journalist Dhanya Rajendran that contained statements detrimental to the image of Susi Ganesan.The application filed by the plaintiff also refers to Manimekalai's actions as constituting a case of Vendetta, naming Susi Ganesan as a sexual harasser a year after she revealed that she was a victim of sexual harassment in 2005 without naming anyone in particular.BackgroundLeena Manimekalai, a renowned filmmaker, poet and artist, earlier approached the Madras High Court by way of a writ, challenging the decision of Regional Passport Officer, Chennai to impound her passport. In 2018, when the #MeToo Movement...

Madras High Court Restrains Leena Manimekalai & Susi Ganesan From Going To Press On #MeToo Case

Sebin James

Since the matter is subjudice, Susi Ganesan and Manimekalai are injuncted from going to the press with regard to the subject matter of the dispute, the court noted in the order.

Tags