‘Provision of law under which legal notice issued to him will be examine’: Dr Mukul Sangma

 Opposition AITC leader and former chief minister Mukul Sangma on Friday said he will examine under which provision of law a legal notice was issued to him by Henry Lalremsanga, the Chairman of 2B’s Group of Companies.

 

Speaking to reporters, Mukul said that he is yet to officially receive the legal notice.

 

“So I will wait. I will see what type of legal notice is given and what are the provisions of law under which he  is sending me this notice. There are also certain aspects which their legal team will know, so we will deal with them as they come,” he said.

 

Asked, the former CM said, “That is why I am saying which provisions of law provide him that opportunity to send me that legal notice will be examined.”

 

The legal notice issued by K Kharmawphlang, the legal counsel representing Henry Lalremsanga had demanded Mukul to tender an unconditional apology within 7 days for incorrectly labelling Lalremsanga as a ‘drug kingpin’

 

The notice was in response to the statements made by Mukul on September 19 and 20.

 

The legal notice demanded for an immediate halt to making or publishing any more false and defamatory remarks against Lalremsanga and a payment of Rs 20 crore within 7 days of the receipt of this notice as compensation for injury to Lalremsanga’s reputation.

 

On September 19 while participating in a motion related to drug menace issue in the Assembly, Mukul had alleged the chief minister Conrad K Sangma of having a close relationship with a drug kingpin while presenting a photograph of the chief minister, his wife and Henry Lalremsanga taken at one of the high-profile meetings held in Delhi. Mukul’s statement was expunged by the Assembly Speaker Thomas A Sangma on September 20.

 

Mukul slammed the chief minister for taking the matter outside the House and suggested that a legal notice should be instead directed towards the chief minister.

 

“Inside the August House my statement was very clear. It has been more of an advisory to the chief minister, it is only the chief minister who has taken it outside the House. He should send a legal notice to the chief minister,” he said.

error: Content is protected !!