Search the Internet          Tips

Probe of Rizvi's deals put off; order
on Shah's bail on Wednesday: PTI

Producing Rizvi before judge A P Bhangale, ED counsel Arun Gupte said the officers had interrogated him on Monday and Tuesday, but were not interested in questioning him further for two days as per a schedule drawn up by the court.

The ED will question Rizvi when necessary, its counsel said. As regards Shah, the ED counsel said the court may pass orders on allowing his interrogation after his bail plea was decided.

Arguments on Shah's bail plea concluded on Tuesday and the judge commenced delivering his order. However, it did not end when the court rose for the day.

Shah's lawyers, led by V R Manohar, stressed that interception of telephonic conversations between the film financier and Karachi-based gangster Chhota Shakeel under the Indian Telegraph Act was illegal because proper procedure was not followed by referring evidence to a review committee.

Public prosecutor Rohini Salian argued that proper procedure had been followed and the review committee had been appointed under the act. She produced government resolutions and other documents to support her argument.

She also read out the transcript of an alleged telephonic conversation between Rizvi and Shakeel, where they spoke about sharing profits of the film Chori Chori Chupke Chupke, financed by Shah.

Meanwhile, the Bombay high court Tuesday adjourned till Wednesday hearing on a Rs 100 crore suit filed by Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray against Outlook for carrying a 'defamatory' article alleging links with the incarcerated film financier.

The court took on record an affidavit filed by Outlook defending its article, saying it was not defamatory and based on facts which were substantially true. The comments against Thackeray were bona fide and drawn in public interest, it claimed.

The magazine urged the high court to vacate its January 23 order restraining it from publishing or repeating the accusations.

Filing an affidavit in the court of Justice H L Gokhale, magazine representative Maheshwari Peri claimed that Thackeray was a public figure and social worker and hence matters concerning him were subjects of public interest.

The press, he said, had a duty to report such matters in public interest.

Outlook contended that even the Srikrishna Commission of Inquiry into the 1992-1993 riots had commented on him and the plaintiff's suit was based on media reports about alleged links of Shah with the Sena leader's family.

Outlook further pointed out that it was a matter of record that the film Hasina Man Jayegi was produced by Smita Thackeray, daughter-in-law of the Sena chief. Even the home minister had said that 10 films financed by Shah had obtained tax concessions from the erstwhile Bharatiya Janata Party-Sena government.

Outlook further alleged that Shah had financed the Michael Jackson concert in Bombay to help the Shiv Udyog Sena floated by Shiv Sena leader Raj Thackeray.

The affidavit disclosed that Thackeray's family had also floated an entertainment company and India Talkies, a chain of restaurants, in joint venture with Shah.

Outlook further claimed that Shah had lent support to the Mukti AIDS Foundation, a charitable organisation set up by Thackeray's daughter-in-law. All these cases indicated that Shah was close to the Thackeray family, the magazine asserted.

''Beyond doubt, there were several dealings between Shah and Thackeray's family. The defendants had made bona fide and fair comments on these dealings,'' the affidavit contended.

The impugned article, published in the magazine's January 22 issue, stated that Shah was possibly arrested because of his proximity with the Thackerays and also because he had financed Hasina Maan Jayegi , produced by Smita Thackeray.

The article also alleged that Shah had helped the Thackerays in 'questionable' financial deals.

''I have no financial dealings with Shah. The innuendo that my family had questionable financial deals is mischievous, false, defamatory and malacious. I have served the country selflessly and without expectations of any returns from society,'' Thackeray said in the suit.

Thackeray has contended the statements about him were false and calculated to defame him and harm his reputation in the eyes of the public.

The Complete Coverage: The Bharat Shah case

Tell us what you think of this report