LI NETWORK
Today again Bombay High Court bench of Justice S Kathawalla and Justice Riyaz Chagla heard Case of Kangana Ranaut office demolition.
Bench asked questions while examining photographs of the property attached by both Kangana Ranaut and BMC.
BMC on September 9 carried out demolition work at the office of Actress situated at upmarket Pali Hill area of Mumbai.
Appearing for Kananga Ranaut Advocate Biren Saraf alleged BMC that the demolition was done only because of the verbal spat that she got into with senior Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut.
Advocate Birendra Saraf to High Court, “She consistently airs her views regarding issues of public importance on social media platforms, some of which at times are critical of the conduct of the administration and government of the day. In recent times, she has been at loggerheads with the government of Maharashtra regarding her views over the handling of certain issues that impact the public in general. This displeased certain quarters and caused angst, particularly [among the members of] a political party which is a part of the government in Maharashtra.”
Advocate Birendra Saraf also said ” Kangana was forced to seek protection from the central government after leaders of a certain party threatened her against returning to Mumbai”.
“It is important to note that the same political party is also the ruling party in the municipal corporation,” the lawyersaid.
Advocate Saraf raised the question on timing and said ‘timing of the demolition’, and said that Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut had given an interview to a news channel where he said, ‘what is law? we need to teach Kangana a lesson’.
“Effectively on the same day at 3.30 pm, the BMC officials reached the bungalow,” also added “They claimed that there was illegal construction work going on but their own photographs show that there was no construction work or even material at the site,” Advocate Birendra Saraf to High Court
“The building was finalised in January and from March there was Covid. Every new house has its teething problems. There was some seepage in the building. That is why you see the furniture is wrapped in plastic, so that paint touch up can be done after fixing seepage problems,” Advocate Saraf to High Court.
Advocate Saraf also pointed to the extent of demolition, “Thirty to forty per cent, but it is not inhabitable now. No one can stay at the building.” The judges too quipped and said that, according to Sanjay Raut, everything is demolished. However, senior counsel Aspi Chinoy, appearing for the BMC, said, “Except for the toilet, there is no portion of the building that is open to the sky. The sidewalls are intact. There can be no water ingress in the monsoon.”
Matter is listed for monday.
