NSA son Ajit Doval accuses Caravan magazine, Jairam Ramesh, of defamation, moves court | India News

NEW DELHI: Vivek Doval, son of Ajit Doval, National Security Advisor (NSA), on Monday filed a defamation complaint against a newspaper magazine for publishing a defamatory article.

In addition to the magazine and the author of the article, Kaushal Shroff, Vivek also filed a complaint against Congress leader, Jairam Ramesh, for holding a press conference on Jan. 17, recalling " unfounded and unfounded facts "described in the article.

The article stated that Vivek ran a hedge fund whose promoters had a questionable history.

He claimed that the magazine had "deliberately dishonored and defamed" in order to "settle accounts with his father".

The Caravan, in its January 16 online newspaper titled "The D Companies," had stated that Vivek, "runs a hedge fund in the Cayman Islands," which is "an established tax haven" and "n & # It was recorded only 13 days later, after the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi demonetised all existing banknotes of 500 and 1,000 rupees in 2016. "

The first Metropolitan Magistrate Samar Vishal will likely be seized of the case on Tuesday.

Vivek alleged that the content of the article was "not unlawful" on his part, but the entire story was presented in a way that suggested "wrongdoing" to readers.

"The very layout of the paragraphs and the intersection of random paragraphs were designed for the sole purpose of confusing the reader in the mind and letting him be persuaded that he there is a bigger plot at stake, under the aegis of the complainant "says the complaint.

He also stated that the social media tweets aired by the magazine had given excerpts from the article, which clearly shows that it is only an attempt targeted to tarnish and tarnish the reputation of Vivek and his family, "political credit in light of the next general election".

"The title of the article itself is, to say the least, outrageous … to create prejudice in the minds of readers against the complainant and his family," the complaint said.

She added that a questionnaire had been sent to Vivek and her older brother on a social networking site, with the aim of seeking clarification, while vaguely mentioning that he was "not sure". was acting a magazine article.

"It is relevant to mention that such a questionnaire was inaccessible and that it suddenly disappeared from the plaintiff's Facebook messenger." According to the complainant's information, the complainant's older brother did not go to work. accessed his email only after the publication of the January 16 article and the January 17 press conference, "the complaint alleged.

He further alleged that no telephone call asked him for clarification, nor that of his older brother, which clearly indicated that the questionnaire was a "simple eyewash intended to complete the procedure" in question. as a defense to criminal proceedings against the accused. knew that "imputations are defamatory and false in themselves".

With respect to Ramesh, the complaint indicated that the press conference he had addressed went "beyond mere narrative in the article" and that it was already prepared and armed to launch an attack, "just waiting for the publication of the article". , who could then provide a "deliberately targeted and deliberate smokescreen on the reputation of the complainant and his family".

According to the article, this article was used as a political tool to "encourage, in unscrupulous hands", to "seek the vendetta and to avenge itself".

The complaint also stated that the author of the article had claimed to have had access to numerous documents and that there was "crucial information that it is appropriate to claim not to be accessible to the author ".

"The facts, namely the history and background of the complainant and his companies, are sufficiently detailed to sufficiently demonstrate that the author deliberately and selectively omitted or claimed certain essential information inaccessible, which would have the effect of to highlight the legality and merits of the complainant's commercial activity, "the complaint alleged.

She also stated that the very act of creating and launching a hedge fund, whether in the Cayman Islands or elsewhere in the world, was not in itself an illegal and illegal act.

"However, even without saying so explicitly, it has been described in such a way that the creation and launching of the hedge fund is perceived as an illegal act," he said.

The complaint alleged that "a network of conjectures and conjectures had been developed by careful and careful selection of random facts about the complainant, his brother and his father – the facts of which were not clear. no link one with the other – and presenting them in a way that suggests deeply rooted plots between family members, to black money laundering, to redirect funds to India through the islands Caymans, in the era of post-demonetization ".

He added: "Although there can be no such explicit claim, a number of issues have been raised in this sense, insinuating and imputing such wrongdoing, thus leaving the public with some negative perception. of the acts of the applicant and members of his family, which was the anticipated and calculated reaction to the questions, innuendo and imputations themselves. "