Preity Zinta Tweets It Feels Good To Move On, After Settling Case Amicably With Ness Wadia

File Picture Courtesy : KXIP

File Picture Courtesy : KXIP

The long standing molestation case involving IPL team Kings XI Punjab Co-owners Ness Wadia and Bollywood actress Preity Zinta has finally ended in an amicable settlement.

This came to light after the Bombay High Court has quashed a 2014 case lodged by city police against industrialist Ness Wadia for allegedly outraging the modesty of Bollywood actor Preity Zinta.

Both Zinta and Wadia along with their lawyers appeared before a division bench of justices Ranjit More and Bharti Dangre in the judges’ chamber. “The case against Ness has been quashed. We have been told by the court not to divulge anything more,” Wadia’s lawyer Aabad Ponda said later.

Zinta’s lawyers also refused to give any details. On October 1, the court had suggested that Wadia and Zinta settle the issue amicably. Zinta’s lawyer had said she was willing to settle the matter if Wadia was ready to apologise.

Preity Zinta took to twitter and said it feels good to move on. Put to rest and forgive

Advocate Ponda had then said that his client was ready to bury the hatchet, but he would not apologise.

The alleged incident had taken place at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai on May 30, 2014 during an Indian Premier League (IPL) match.

According to the complaint, Wadia was abusing the team staff over ticket distribution when Zinta asked him to calm down as their team was winning.

He abused her too and molested her by grabbing her arm, Zinta alleged, as per the first information report (FIR) lodged on June 13, 2014 under IPC sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 509 (using word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).

In February this year, police filed a charge sheet against Wadia, following which he approached the high court seeking quashing of the case. In his petition, Wadia claimed the case arose out of “personal vengeance” and the incident was merely a “misunderstanding”.

To Top