Uddhav’s plea for in-camera trial refused by HC

There has been a row over Bal Thackeray’s will after Uddhav’s elder brother Jaidev challenged it.

November 11, 2014 10:09 am | Updated November 16, 2021 07:29 pm IST - MUMBAI

Uddhav Thackeray. File Photo: Vivek Bendre

Uddhav Thackeray. File Photo: Vivek Bendre

In a disappointment for Shiv Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray, the Bombay High Court on Monday refused his plea for in-camera hearing of late Bal Thackeray’s will row.

On Monday, Jaidev Thackeray strongly opposed Uddhav Thackeray’s application seeking in-camera trial. “No reason has been cited for seeking in-camera trial, apart from the fact that there is a public figure involved. The application has to be substantiated by strong reasons,” advocate Seema Sarnaik, appearing for Mr. Jaidev, pleaded.

The court too upheld the contention. “One is a public figure is no criterion to give this matter preferential treatment or to make an exception that is not applicable (in this case),” Justice Gautam Patel said.

But the judge also passed strong comments against Jaidev Thackeray when he pleaded that the trial “should not at all be allowed to be in-camera.” “This statement gives an impression that your client (Jaidev Thackeray) is inclined to play to the gallery. I will not allow this. This trial will go on like any other trial,” Justice Patel said.

Uddhav Thackeray’s lawyer had pleaded that some witnesses might not feel free if they were to know that their statements were to be recorded publicly. “Given the identity of the plaintiff and their standing in the society, I propose in-camera trial,” advocate Rajesh Shah pleaded.

But the court refused to allow it. “I can understand if the matter was about assault on a woman, or about matrimonial dispute. But in this case, the judgement will anyway be in public domain, the record will be available publicly. I don’t want to give a blanket stay. This is the price of being a public figure,” Justice Gautam Patel said.

The court, though, allowed Uddhav Thackeray to seek in-camera trial of specific witnesses, if he could substantiate his application with sufficient evidence. Mr Uddhav had also sought that evidence of two attesting witnesses be recorded before recording the statement of the plaintiff. But the court refused this plea too. The court has already framed issues in the matter. It will start examining the witnesses from December 4.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.