BJP Member of Parliament and actor Kangana Ranaut has formally sought exemption from a personal court appearance in Bathinda, Punjab. She cited her mandatory attendance at the ongoing winter session of Parliament as the primary reason for her inability to be present before the judicial magistrate.
Parliamentary Duty Takes Precedence
On Monday, Ranaut's legal counsel moved an application before the Bathinda court. The application referenced a prior plea filed on October 27, which had requested permission for the MP to appear via video conferencing instead of in person. The latest submission emphasized that the winter session of Parliament demands strict adherence to parliamentary protocols and schedules.
Her counsel argued that her absence was unavoidable and due to official commitments that require her to be outside Punjab. The inability of the applicant to be present on the date of the hearing is solely due to reasons beyond her control, the application stated, adding that her absence was neither deliberate nor intentional.
Court Adjourns Hearing to 2026
In response to the application, the court has adjourned the matter. Prosecution counsel Raghbir Singh Behniwal confirmed that the next hearing is now scheduled for January 5, 2026. This significant postponement provides ample time for both sides to prepare their next steps.
The court also issued specific directions for the future proceedings. It asked the complainant, Mohinder Kaur, to provide a list of any additional witnesses she intends to produce. Furthermore, the bench instructed Ranaut's defence counsel to be fully prepared to cross-examine these witnesses during the next hearing.
Legal Proceedings and Next Steps
The court has also called for a formal rejoinder from Kangana Ranaut's legal team. They must respond to the complainant's reply opposing the MP's application for personal exemption. This sets the stage for detailed legal arguments when the case reconvenes in 2026.
This criminal defamation suit has been a point of legal attention, and the adjournment marks a pivotal moment in its timeline. The court's decision to grant a long date suggests the complexity of aligning the schedules of a sitting parliamentarian with judicial processes.
