In a surprising turn of events, Mahua Moitra's legal counsel has stepped down from her defamation case following a stern reprimand by the Delhi High Court in response to allegations of attempted coercion by Jai Anant Dehadrai. The court, which is presiding over Moitra's lawsuit against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey and Supreme Court lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai, expressed its shock at the actions of the Trinamool Congress MP's attorney. The lawyer had reportedly sought Dehadrai's withdrawal of his complaint before the Central Bureau of Investigation in exchange for a pet dog. The attorney in question, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, officially recused himself from representing Moitra in this case. A subsequent hearing is scheduled for October 31.

This development comes after Moitra initiated a defamation lawsuit against Dubey and Dehadrai earlier in the week, stemming from allegations that she accepted bribes in exchange for posing questions in Parliament.

Jai Anant Dehadrai, who is estranged from Moitra, publicly disclosed that there was an attempt to pressure him into withdrawing his complaint. He unequivocally declined the offer.

The court posed a pointed question to the senior advocate, saying, "I'm truly appalled. Have you been in contact with defendant number 2 (Jai) regarding this matter? Did you attempt to act as a mediator?" When Jai raised objections, he decided to remove himself from the case.

Dehadrai stated, "An attempt was made yesterday afternoon to pressure me into withdrawing my CBI complaint and my letter to Nishikant Dubey in exchange for Henry (the dog)." He has pledged to furnish CBI with detailed information about this encounter.

He added, "The messenger is entirely innocent but reveals everything about her," apparently alluding to the MP.

Dehadrai had purportedly supplied 'evidence' to Dubey, ostensibly demonstrating that Moitra had accepted bribes from businessman Darshan Hiranandani.

On Thursday, Hiranandani submitted a three-page affidavit, asserting that Moitra had shared her Parliament login credentials with him, enabling him to "directly post questions on her behalf." He claimed that Moitra had targeted Gautam Adani with the intention of defaming and embarrassing Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Moitra challenged the authenticity of the affidavit, citing its absence of an official letterhead or notarized documentation. She expressed her doubts, saying, "The affidavit is printed on plain white paper and lacks an official letterhead or notarization. Why would one of India's most respected and educated businessmen sign such a document on plain paper, unless he was under duress?"

High Court stays proceedings against Hero MotoCorp, its Chairman in counterfeiting case

Manish Sisodia's Judicial Custody Extended in Delhi Excise Policy Case