Brief Summary: –
1.1. One Special Civil Suit No. 417 of 2023 was filed before Senior Division Civil Judge at Nagpur by Shri. Prakash Pohare, Editor-in-Chief of Dainik Deshonnati active member of NGO Awaken India Movement and renowned Farmer Leader.
1.2. In the said suit the Plaintiff Shri Prakash POhare claimed damages and compensation of Rs. 10,000 crores from Adar Poonawalla & Serum Institute for defamation by publication of false and misleading allegations against Awaken India Movement (AIM) team members.
1.3. In the said suit, the court issued suit summons and show cause notice to the Defendant’s Sh. Adar Poonawalla Serum Institute & ors.
1.4. The Serum Institute and Adar Poonawalla’s have filed false and misleading affidavit before the Civil Court of Senior Division.
1.5. The Plaintiff Sh. Prakash Pohre moved an Application for taking action Against Poonawalla’s & Serum Institution.
1.6. Court registered said application as Miscellaneous Judicial Case (MJC) No. 301 of 2024.
1.7. After Conducting enquiry and after verifying the record, the Court come to the conclusion that the Adar Cryus Poonawalla, Serum Institute are guilty of playing fraud upon the Court by filing false affidavit with dishonest suppression and twisting of Material facts.
Therefore, the Court ordered their prosecution under Section 181, 182, 193, 199, 200, 465, 471, 474, r/w 120(B) & 34 of IPC, by directing Court Officer to become Complainant before the Magistrate Court.
1.8. Said order was challenged by Adar Poonawalla and Serum Company before Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) [Criminal Writ Petition No. 625 of 2024]
1.9. In the above said Criminal Writ Petition (WP) No. 625 , the Serum Company and Poonawalla’s have again filed false and misleading affidavit and again suppressed the crucial material facts from the High Court. The said affidavit also contains various false, scandalous, baseless, reckless, absurd, contemptuous and highly defamatory allegations against the Hon’ble Senior Division Civil Judge.
2.Hearing before High Court:
2.1. The matter came for first hearing on 12.08.2024 before the Bench of Hon’ble Justice G.A. Sanap.
2.2. The counsel for Respondent Adv. Nilesh Ojha, took objection about maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of availability of remedy of appeal u/s 341 of Cr.P.C. is provided which should be heard by the District Court.
He gave various judgements of Constitution Benches of the Supreme Court and High Court.
2.3. The Senior Counsel Sh. Anand Jaiswal appearing for Poonawalla’s and Serum Company had sought time to go through the said judgements.
As per his request the hearing of the case was adjourned to 19.08.2024. In the meantime (till 19.08.2024) as a temporary relief, the impugned order is stayed.
2.4. Though the stay was temporary and only for limited period up to 19.08.2024 and it was not on merits the Poonawalla’s and Serum Company and their advocate Ritesh Badhe have supplied one sided and distorted information to the media suggesting that the Poonawalla got the permanent relief from High Court and order is stayed. The news published in this regard in Times of India is thus one sided and misleading.
3. New Application for action under perjury and contempt against Adar Poonawalla & Serum Company.
3.1. On Saturday 17.08.2024, Shri Prakash Pohare moved a petition before High Court seeking action under perjury and contempt against Adar Poonawalla and Serum Company.
Said Criminal Application is registered as APPW/133/2024.
3.2. The prayers in the said application areas under;
“Request: – It is therefore humbly requested that this Hon’ble Court may pleased to;
(a) Take cognizance of false, unfounded, scandalous scurrilous, reckless, contemptuous and gross defamatory allegations made against Hon’ble Senior Division Civil Judge by the Petitioners, in their memo of petition which is sworn on affidavit;
(b) To take action as per Section 379 of BNSS and Contempt, as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Municipal Council Tikamgarh v. Matsya Udyog Sahkari Samiti, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1900, ABCD v. Union of India, (2020) 2 SCC 52, Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan vs Union of India (2019) 14 SCC 761 , New Delhi Municipal Council v. Prominent Hotels Limited, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11910 and Godrej &Boyce Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India,1991 SCC OnLine Bom 496.
(c) Impose heavy cost as per sec 381 of BNS upon the Petitioners by quantifying it in proportion with the valuation of the Suit, which is Rs. 10,000 Crores, by applying the ratio laid down in Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan vs Union of India (2019) 14 SCC 761 & New Delhi Municipal Council v. Prominent Hotels Limited, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11910;
(d) Order non-baillable warrant of arrest against accused as per sec. 379 of BNSS as per law and ratio laid down in the case of Arvinder Singh Vs UOI (1998) 6SCC 352;
(e) Direct Registrar of this Hon’ble Court to file a complaint against the Petitioners Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd., Mr. Adar Poonawalla, Mr. Vivek Pradhan & others under relevant sections of BNSS applicable for filing false and misleading affidavit to obtain favourable order.
(f) Record a specific findings about the role, duty, responsibility and complicity of advocates for Petitioners about their act of commission & omission in filling such false & frivolous petition by suppression of material facts on affidavit and take action against them as per law laid down in Lal Bahadur Gautam Vs. State of U.P. (2019) 6 SCC 441 & A Vakil: In re, 1926 SCC OnLine All 365, M. Veerbhadra Rao Vs Tek Chand AIR 1985 SC 28 ;
(g) Pass any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit & proper under the facts and circumstances of this case.”
3.3. The Petition filed by Adar Poonawalla and Perjury Petition under section 379 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) which is equivalent to section 340 of Cr.P.C. will come for hearing together on Monday 19.08.2024.
3.4. Probably it I the first application under section 379 of BNSS.
3.5. Earlier many litigants like Adar Poonawalla and many advocates like Shri Ritesh Badhe are punished and sentenced by the Supreme Court for making such false, baseless, unfounded, defamatory & scandalous allegations against Judges.
3.6. In this case following advocates are representing Sh. Prakash Pohre:-
Adv. O.D. Kakde, Adv. Shailesh Narnawre, Adv. Chandrakant Rohankar, Adv. Tanveer Nizam, Adv. Dipali Ojha, Adv. Vivek Ramteke, Adv. Pravin Chwre, Adv. Gopal Karhale, Adv. Vijay Kurle, Adv. Abhishek Mishra, Adv. Pramod Dethe, Adv. Snehal Surve, Adv. Hania Sheikh, Adv. Pratik Jain (Saklecha).
