Talk:M. J. Akbar

Please go to

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC) M J Akbar's date of birth : This has been given differently as January 11 and January 21 as well as the year also as 1951 and 1953 in Google and Wikipedia articles on his biography. This needs proper checking and due correction.--68.193.2.168 (talk) 16:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC). In the Wikipedia article itself, the year of his birth has been mentioned as 1951 in the introductory line and as 1953 in the template below his photograph.--68.193.2.168 (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC). If M J Akbar had done his B A (Hons.) during 1967 - 1970, then his birth year must have been 1951 and he is (must be) 61 years old now. In that case, the template text needs correction. --68.193.2.168 (talk) 17:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC) I have incorporated the correction in the date of birth of M J Akbar (as 11 January, 1951). The basis for this is the biography article cited under reference number 2 in this article itself. It is also mentioned that his Zodiac Sign is Capricorn, which rules out the possibility of 21 January being his birth date, (for which the Zodiac Sign would have been Aquarius). The Google article on his biography also gives his date of birth as 11 January, 1951. This is also further justified that he did his B A (Hons) course during 1967 - 1970, when he was 16 - 19 years old, then.--68.193.2.168 (talk) 01:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing about his books like the famous The siege within. Is there a special reason for this? --R. la Rue (talk) 09:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131206011849/http://www.mjakbar.org:80/mjpics.htm to http://www.mjakbar.org/mjpics.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—

I have just modified 3 external links on M. J. Akbar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526150611/http://www.hindustantimes.com/70-s-The-decade-of-innocence/Article1-700294.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/70-s-The-decade-of-innocence/Article1-700294.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930081629/http://www.eci.gov.in/SR_KeyHighLights/LS_1989/Vol_I_LS_89.pdf to http://www.eci.gov.in/SR_KeyHighLights/LS_1989/Vol_I_LS_89.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140520125525/http://www.storyology.org.au/speakers/m-j-akbar to http://www.storyology.org.au/speakers/m-j-akbar

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:32, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Due to him being one of the people accused of sexual harrasment in me too in India a lot of people are googling him. Ankur Bhandari (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence in this section looks like this - MJ Akbar subsequently appealed to Delhi High Court. On 11 August 2021, the Delhi High Court observed that the lower court had erroneously acquitted Priya Ramani in the defamation case and admitted the appeal.[32][33]

The fact of the matter is that this portion the Delhi High Court observed that the lower court had erroneously acquitted Priya Ramani in the defamation case and admitted the appeal is not correct. The matter is sub judice and we should be careful while ascribing statements to the court. The Delhi high court never 'observed that the lower court had erroneously acquitted Priya Ramani....'

This was a submission made by the counsel of M J Akbar while challenging the lower court's order. The sources cited in are -

https://scroll.in/latest/1002605/trial-court-erroneously-acquitted-priya-ramani-in-defamation-case-mj-akbars-counsel-tells-delhi-hc and https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/delhi-hc-admits-mj-akbars-appeal-against-acquittal-of-priya-ramani-in-defamation-case/articleshow/88874212.cms?from=mdr

Check both the cited sources, none of them makes any mention of the Delhi high court making an observation to the effect that the lower court's acquittal of Ms Priya Ramani was erroneous. Here is the headline from the scroll article , cited as a source - Trial court erroneously acquitted Priya Ramani in defamation case, MJ Akbar’s counsel tells Delhi HC It is very clear that this was a submission by M J Akbar's counsel and not the Delhi high court, and indeed no court in the world gives such a kind of observation even before the case in itself concludes and a final order is passed by the respective judges.

Suggest rewording the last sentence to - 'MJ Akbar subsequently appealed to Delhi High Court. On 11 August 2021 the Delhi High Court issued a notice to journalist Priya Ramani based on the plea filed by MJ Akbar.'

Suksane (talk) 16:07, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

anyone with a different opinion? I will wait a few more days before making a change in the main article. Suksane (talk) 07:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]