view : ww the SUPREME couRT OF MaVitIae Inthe matter of Honourable Dharmendar SESUNGKUR also known as Honourable Sudhir SESUNGKUR, Minister of Financial Services, Good Govemance and Institutional Reforms, of SICOM Tower, Wall Stret, Ebene. PLAINTIFF 1. Marie Pamela Seedheeyan, a Schoo! Teacher of Victoria, Trou d'Eau Douce. 2, Premchand Teeluckdharry also known as Vikash Teeluckdharry, a Barrister at Law, of Suite 401, 3r¢ flor, Chancery House, Lislet Geaffroy Street, Port Louis, DEFENDANTS PLAINT WITH SUMMONS 1. Plainti isthe Minister of Financial Services, Good Governance and Institutional Reforms since 24 January 2017. He is a Member ofthe National Assembly since December 2014 elected as member ofthe ruling party, the Mouvernent Socialiste Miltant (MSM). 2. Plaintiff had been returned as member of the National Assembly for Constituency 'No.10 (Montagne Blanche & Grand River South East) topping thelist atthe 2014 general elections. 3, Plaintif e marred and isthe father of two children, Plaintif is @ person of good character, honour and enjays a good reputation locally and abroad, 4, Plaintif has occupied various posts and acted in diferent capacities in his 30 years of ‘experience inthe financial services sector ‘Member of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, UK Licensed Auditor ofthe Financial Reporting Council Registered insolvency Practitioner Fellow of Mauritius Insitute of Directors ‘Mamber of Maurtius institute vf Pubic Accountants5, Plainif started his career at PricewaterhouseCoopers where he worked in the Assurance ‘and Business Advisory Department for over 12 years before he moved on at Partner level (of various firms of accountants such as Baker Tily, Untl recentiy, Plaitif wes the ‘Managing Partner of Mazars SCRL. 6. Plainif has, at the Intemational level, led various key assignments for multinational {groups and projects across Africa financed by international funding institutions such 2s the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, USAID, UNDP and the Global Fund. 7. Defendant No 1 is @ School Teacher and is the lawfully wedded wife of one Jeetendrasingh Seedheeyan, a notorious politcal agent of the MSM political party in Constituency No.10. 8. Defendant No 2is a practicing Barrister at Law whose services have been retained by Defendant No 1 8. Plaintiff avers that on or about 4 July 2017, the Defendant No 1 made a precautionary measure statement against Plaintif end which was reported nationwide and abroad inthe rRewspaper express” in its edition of 28° July 2017 as well as online a “lexpress.mu" 10.Plaintff avers that following the publication ofthe highly detamatory article in ‘Yexpress” ‘newspaper, on 27” July 2017 the Plaintiff made @ counter statement which was published in the newspaper "Le Defi Quotidien’ at page 7 thereof denying the false, malicious, defamatory and baseless allegations leveled by the Defendant No 1 against him and as feported in the newspaper “'express” on 23° July 2017. +11. Plaintif avers that prior to his aforementioned counter statement n the press, on 24" July 2017, he had lodged a formal complaint against the Defendant No 1 at Maka police station for harassment and defamation. Defendant No 1 was wanted’ by the Central Criminal Investigation Division (CCID) for an under warning interrogation. 42.Plaintiff avers that on 28" July 2017, the Defendant No 1 accompanied by Defendant No 2, her Barrister at Law, proceeded to the CCID at Les Casemes to make a complaint ‘against the Plaintft 3. Pisin’ aves that un the seine day after the Defendant No 1 was interogated under ‘warning by the CCID as regards the complaint made by Plaintif al Moka police station on 224" july 2017, the Defendant No 1 proceeded to make another complaint against Pini. +4 Plaintiff avers that after the complaint of the Defendant No 1 was lodged, the Defendant No 1 and the Defendant No 2, her Barrister, addressed themselves to the media representatives present at the Central Criminal Investigation Department headquarters and made a declaration tothe press.16.(a) Plaintiff avers that the Defendant No 1 made @ verbal declaration in the following terms: (e 2 Monsieur Sesungkur mo W/deman i enn|ied/Mais erisin6)6 ‘salina toure sa line commans fer mol fer coumma dir bann zafer |sévices sexuols of bann mosaz indécent...» (b) Plaintiff avers thatthe said words uttered by the Defendant No. 1 as reproduced at paragraph 18 (a) above, within the context ofthe events referred to above, meant and ‘was understood to mean that:- |. the Plaintiff had been sending indecent text messages to the Defendant No 1; il, the Plaintiff is a person of bad character and repute li, the Plaintifis a liar; iv. the Plaintiffs a womanizer; ¥. the Plaintiff isa sadist and a sexual offender, Vi. the Plain is involved in immoral andlor indecont activities; vii. the Plaintiff had been making indecent sexval proposals in text messages; vill. the Plaintiff had been sexually harassing Defendant No 1 in his capacty as Minister; x. the Plaintiff had been sending text messages of sexual connotations to Defendant No 1; x. the Plaintiff had been debauching Defendant No 1 by sending indecent text messages of sexual nature: and x1, the Defendant No 1 was looking for favours from the Plant. 16.2) Plain avers that the Defendant No 2 thereafter made a verbal deciaration as follows, ic, ene Série de mesaz guide nature harcélementetauss/indmidation, NMesaz qui contenir beaucoup mots insutants bann gros mots couma mo pou met sa en anglais de la part d'un ministre pou... mo pou dir sa ‘common and vulgar’ ot lera tou sala termine parmenas mo cient pou anlev lek pou fini ‘csi isimy view that the minister Sesunghur will eventually be arrested ‘nits matter.» (©) Plaintiff avers that the words uttered by the Defendant No. 2 a8 reproduced at paragraph 16 (a) above, in their proper context, meant and were understood to mean that the Piaintif had been sending various indecent and insulting text messages to the Defendant No 1; u is a person of bad character, Is vulgar and of bad repute:iv, the Plaintiffs a sadist and a sexual offender; ¥. the Plaintfs involved in immoral and/or indecent activities; ‘vi the Plain had been making indecent sexual proposals in text messages; vii the Plaintif had been sexually harassing Defendant No 1 in his capacity as Minister; vill. the Plsintif had been sending various text messages of sexual connotations to Defendant No 1 inviting her for sexual favours; ix te Plait haa been swearing at Defendant No 1 various text messages: the Plaintiff had been debauching Defendant No by sending indecent text messages of sexual nature; xi. the Plaintiff had been intimidating andlor threatening the Defendant No 1 by sending various text messages of an intimidating character, xsl, the Plaintiff as a Minister had no proper mannerism: sil, the Plaintiff had threatened to kidnap the Defendant No 1 in various text messages and then murder her; and xiv. the Plaintiff will be arrested by the Police based on the allegatiors of the Defendant No. 1 17.(a) Plaintif avers that on or about 2 August 2017, the Defendant No, 2 made another ‘Verbal declaration which was widely reported on fadio, audiovisual mecia and in the atten press nationwide, abroad, on the internet and on social media, as fllows:= ‘cl Boleve minister Sésungkur willbe arrested and brought betbre’a Court of Lew. (b) Plaintiff avers that the words uttered by the Defendant No 2 as reproduced at paragraph 17 (a) above, in their proper context, meant and were understood to mean that: i. the Plaintiffs a person of bad character, is vulgar and of bad repute: the Plaintiffs a criminal andlor Is involved in criminal activites; lik the Plaintif is involved in immoral andlor indecent activites; iv. the Plaintif will be questioned under warning by the Police on the allegations rade by the Defendant No 1 and the Defendant No 2; v. the Plaintiff will be arrested by the Police based on the allegations of the: Defendant No 1; ‘vlan arrest warrant will be issued against the Plant, vil the Plaintf will be charged on a provisional information and presented before: a Court of Law: vil, the Plaintif wil have to answer the allegations of the Defendant No 1 and Defendant No 2 before 2 Court of Law; and {x the Plaintif will have to anewer a criminal charge before 2 Courtof Law. 48.Plaintff avers that the aforementioned highly defamatory declarations made by the Defendants contained improper motives against him and the statements made by the Defendents 92 8 whole meant and wae meant to impute thati. Piaintif was not @ person of sound morally instead he was @ cook, vile, dishonest and unscrupulous person; ji, Plaintif was involved in the sexual harassment of the Defendant No 1 inasmuch fas he had sent several indecent text messages of sexual nature to her, li, Plaintiff was at all material times actuated by sexual motives, and was bent on indulging in a sexual relationship with the Defendant No 1 by luring her thorough indecent text messages; iv, Plantffin his capacity as Minister of Financil Services, Good Governance and Institutional Reforms had at all material tines, been intimately Involved in dealings with tho said Pamela Seecheoyan; vv, _ Plaintf had committed a criminal offence by sending indecent text messag Vi. the Plaintif had been intimidating andor teatening the Defendant No. 1 by sending various text messages of an intimidating character, vi, the Plaintiff as @ Minister had no proper mamnerism; vii, the Plaintif had threatened to kidnap the Defendant No 1 in various text, messages and murder her; x. Plaintif will be arrested by the Police based on the complaint made by the Defendant No 1 x. _ gn arrest warrant wil be issued against the Pint; Xi. the Plaintiff will be charged on @ provisional information and presented before ‘a Court of Law: xi, the Plalatif will have to answer the allegatons of the Defendant No 1 and Defendant No 2 before a Court of Law xii, Piaintif will have to answer a criminal charge before a Court of Law; xiv. Plaintiff had acted ilegally and unlawfully, and did so in total disregard of the criminal laws of Maurits. 19.Plainttf avers thatthe verbal statements andlor dectarations made by the Defendants as. ‘a whole, referred to above are false, malicious, highly defamatory and do constitute direct attacks on the Plaintifs professional and politcal abilties, experience, good character, honour and reputation, made withthe view to cause damage and prejudice to Plant in his professional, polticel end social Ife as a respected accountant, politician, minister, social worker and citizen, 20. Plaintiff avers that after the publication and nationwide circulation of the statements made: by the Defendants through the writen press andlor audiovisual media andlor on social {@) Plaintiff has been the subject of vile and humiliating remarks from members ofthe: public and on social media. It also caused serious embarrassment to Paintin his ‘epacity 98 6 Minister when being questioned by mombere of the Central Criminal Investigation Depariment and by persons from his constituency. (©)Plainti?’s family has suffered embarassment anc humilistion when boing ‘questioned by relatives, colleagues and acquaintances about the aforementioned aricles,21. Plant avers thatthe ects and dongs of the Defendants constitute a “faute” and thatthe Defendants have acted negligently, toriously,imprudently andlor out of want of caution by making such statements, 22. Paint avers that the particulars of such “Yaute", negligence and imprudence are:- (@) The said statements have portrayed the Plant as a sexual offender and a corrupt Minister, who would resort to any means to obtain sexual favours. (b) Deliberately making statements to the media which were widely published and Circulated locally, abroad and on internet when such statements contains false, malicious, gratuitous, unfounded and untrue allegetions and innuendos. (6) Defendant No.2, as a Barrister at Law, has acted unprofessionally with total isrogard to ethics. 23.Plaintff avers that the wrongful acts and doings of the Defendants have caused him considerable damage and prejudice which he values at Rs 25,000,000, which amount the Defendants, are jointy and in solide, bound to make good to the Ptainf. 24, Plant therefore prays from this Honourable Court for Judgment (2) Ordering the Defendants, jointy and in soido, to pay to the Plaintif the said sum (of Rs 25,000,000 as damages for he reasons fuly set forth above; and (©) Ordering the Defendants to publish at their own costs inthe dally newspapers end their online editions, on radio and social media and wherever thor statements were displayed, a full and unreserved apology to the Plaintiff and his family. With Coste You, the above named Defendanis are hereby required, caled upon and summoned 12 pear bplore the Supreme Court pf Maurtus,stuate at Jules Koeng Steet, Port Lous, Fret day of Noses 2017, at 09.30 am to answer fo he hove named Plain he above mati WARNING you the sbevenames Deiandanis that in case you fail to appear or lo be represented on the aforesaid date and hour the Court may deliver judgment against you In {avour of the Plaintif, in terms of the present Paint ‘TAKE NOTICE you, the above named Defendants, in order that you may not plead or pretend Ignorance of same, that the plaintff shall at the hearing of the above matter, adduce in evidence the documents hereunder specified and that you shall be required to admit that such documents as ae slated to be originals are true originals; that such documents as are stated tobe copies are true copies, and have been wilten, signed and executed as they purport tohave been, saving alljust exceptions as to he admissibility ofihe said documents as evidence inthis cause. Description of Documents 41. News Article dated 26" July 2017 published on lexoressmu 2: News Aticle dated 28" July 2017 published on inside News — online publication 3. Page 11 ofthe newspaper ‘Texpress" dated 29" July 20°7 4, Page 11 ofthe newspaper ‘Le Defi Pus" dated 29° July 2017 Issued by the Plaintif above named with election of domicile inthe office of the undersigned Attorney at law, situate at 3 Floor, Les Jamalacs Building, Vieux Conseil Street, Port Lous. Under al legal reservations, Dated at Port Lous, this 8 day of September 2017, SS. -_. ‘Sivakumaren MARDEMOOTOO 03" Floor, Les Jamalacs Bulding, Vieux Consell Street, Port Louis Attomey forthe Plaintiff instructing 8. Hawoldar of Counsel To the Defendants above named and styled.