Allegations of Continued Defamation Despite Legal Notices; Plaintiff Seeks Attachment of Defendants’ Properties, Bank Guarantees and Civil Detention Subject to Statutory Conditions!
Satish Salian Pays the Requisite Court Fees in Accordance with Judicial Procedure for His ₹2,000 Crore Damages Suit!
Sanjay Raut, Anil Deshmukh, Sushma Andhare, Akhil Chitre, Aseem Sarode and Nikhil Wagle Also Named as Defendants; Suit Cites Evidence Challenging Aaditya Thackeray’s Public Statements and Alleges That the Defendants Suppressed Important High Court Findings and Evidence to Mislead the Public Through Selective, False and Misleading News Reports, Press Conferences and Interviews!
99% of the Compensation Recovered to Be Deposited in Government Funds for the Welfare of the Poor and Victims of Police Atrocities, Abuse of State Power and Injustice, as Stated in the Suit!
Only 1% for Himself, Remaining 99% for the Welfare of Victims! Satish Salian Expresses His Commitment to Public Welfare and Social Justice in the Suit!
Thane | Special Correspondent
In a significant legal development in the Disha Salian death case, her father, Shri Satish Salian, who has been pursuing legal remedies to secure justice for his daughter, has stated that he has filed a civil suit seeking ₹2,000 crore in damages against eight persons, including Aaditya Thackeray and Uddhav Thackeray.
The suit contains serious allegations that, despite being served with legal notices, the defendants failed to withdraw their allegedly defamatory statements and instead continued publishing and circulating false, misleading and damaging allegations against the bereaved father.
The plaintiff has sought not only substantial monetary compensation but also directions requiring the defendants to disclose details of their assets, furnish a bank guarantee or other adequate security for ₹2,000 crore, and, where legally justified, face attachment of their properties before judgment.
The suit further seeks appropriate orders concerning detention in civil prison, subject to compliance with the statutory requirements prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Evidence Challenging Aaditya Thackeray’s Allegedly False Statements Placed on Record!
The suit sets out detailed allegations and supporting material concerning various public statements made by Aaditya Thackeray in connection with the Disha Salian case, which the plaintiff contends are false, misleading and mutually contradictory.
Particular reference has been made to Aaditya Thackeray’s public position concerning his acquaintance with Rhea Chakraborty, his reported explanation regarding his whereabouts on the night of 8 June 2020, mobile tower-location records, eyewitness accounts and electronic material stated to have emerged during investigations conducted by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB).
According to the plaintiff, these materials raise serious questions concerning the accuracy and credibility of the public versions advanced by Aaditya Thackeray and require proper examination by the competent investigating authorities.
Serious Allegations of Misleading the Public by Suppressing Important High Court Findings and Evidence!
The suit alleges that the defendants deliberately ignored or suppressed significant observations contained in the High Court’s orders and important material relating to the investigation.
It is further alleged that, through press conferences, media interviews, news reports and social media statements, the defendants circulated selective, incomplete, false and misleading information, thereby creating a distorted public narrative concerning the Disha Salian case.
According to the plaintiff, the defendants attempted to portray his continuing legal struggle for justice as politically motivated, thereby attacking his honesty, reputation, credibility and personal dignity.
The plaintiff maintains that such conduct cannot be justified merely on the ground of political disagreement, freedom of expression or the right to publicly defend a person facing allegations.
The suit specifically contends that, even after receiving legal notices, the defendants continued their allegedly defamatory campaign instead of withdrawing or correcting their statements. The plaintiff has relied upon this continued conduct in support of his claim for damages amounting to ₹2,000 crore.
The plaintiff has also sought directions requiring the removal of the allegedly defamatory videos, press conferences, interviews, news reports and social media posts, together with appropriate injunctive relief to prevent the repetition of similar statements in the future.
The substantial damages claimed, the request for security and attachment of assets, and the allegations concerning suppression of judicial findings and evidence have brought a new dimension to the legal proceedings surrounding the Disha Salian case.
The focus will now be on the judicial consideration of the plaintiff’s claims, the evidence placed on record and the responses of the eight defendants.
