Bombay High Court: Nagpur Journalist Claims Voice Was Morphed in Shivaji Remark Case

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Koratkar approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail, but on Friday, the court refused to grant him interim relief.

Nagpur-based journalist Prashant Koratkar is facing legal trouble after a case was filed against him for allegedly making derogatory remarks about Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and his son, Chhatrapati Sambhaji.

However, Koratkar has denied all allegations, claiming that the audio clip in question was “morphed” and that his “phone had been hacked.

Koratkar approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail, but on Friday, the court refused to grant him interim relief. The journalist is accused of threatening Kolhapur-based historian Indrajeet Sawant and making inflammatory remarks that could incite communal enmity.

According to the complaint, an audio recording of a conversation between Koratkar and Sawant allegedly contained objectionable remarks. However, Koratkar maintained that he had not made such statements and that the audio had been tampered with. He also stated that he had already issued a public apology while seeking protection from arrest.

Before approaching the High Court, Koratkar had applied for anticipatory bail in the Kolhapur Sessions Court, but his plea was rejected.

A Bench of Justice Rajesh Patil in the Bombay High Court has agreed to hear his petition on Monday.

Advocate Ashish Raje Gaikwad, representing one of the complainants, opposed any relief for Koratkar. Gaikwad informed the court that, apart from the FIR filed by Sawant in Kolhapur, two more FIRs had been registered against the journalist.

The court has asked Gaikwad to assist the prosecution in the case and scheduled the next hearing for March 24.

Historian Indrajeet Sawant had posted a video on social media in which he detailed his conversation with Koratkar. The video was uploaded before the FIR was registered.

Koratkar argued that Sawant’s decision to release the video before filing the case was meant to “incite communal tensions” and “provoke a breach of peace,” especially since the content was posted “late at night.”

After the video went viral, there was significant public outrage. Fearing for his safety, Koratkar approached the police and requested protection for himself and his family on March 4.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE

author

Minakshi Bindhani

LL.M( Criminal Law)| BA.LL.B (Hons)

Similar Posts