PUTRAJAYA (Jan 3): Preacher Dr Zakir Naik's (pictured) defamation suit against former Batu Uban assemblyman S Raveentharan will be heard at the Penang High Court.

This follows the Federal Court on Monday (Jan 3) dismissing Zakir's leave to appeal after allowing a preliminary objection made by Raveentharan's lawyers Datuk T Tharumarajah and Kernail Singh.

Justice Datuk Vernon Ong, in allowing the preliminary objection, said the issue raised by Raveentharan is on jurisdiction or an exercise of its jurisdiction.

He said the motion for leave to appeal must relate to a matter in the High Court in its original jurisdiction.

Justice Ong said based on the preliminary objection, the decision of the Court of Appeal was also upheld as the motion is not heard on its merit.

“I am constrained, and hence allow the dismissal of (Zakir's) motion for leave to appeal,” the judge said.

Earlier, Kernail had argued that Zakir's motion for the appeal was incompetent, based on case laws such as those of Megat Najmuddin and Raphael Pura.

He said when the merits of an appeal were not heard by the lower courts, after allowing a preliminary objection, the apex court should not grant leave (permission) to hear the appeal on its full merits.

Senior counsel Datuk Sulaiman Abdullah, who appeared with Dr Rafie Shafie and Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader for Zakir, argued that as we enter a new year, the court should consider their client's application for leave to appeal and not be bogged down with such objection.

“The respondent (Raveentharan) did not indicate or was willing to tell us what their preliminary objection to be made during case management of the matter is. When they attended the case management, they were asked whether they will make any objection but at that time did not indicate any.”

Sulaiman said when an application is made on the irregularity, the person should state what the grounds are but in this case, the respondent did not indicate any. Hence, he argued that the apex court should hear the motion for leave to appeal.

Tharumarajah in reply said Justice Ong had made prior decisions to this even at the Federal Court level in not listening to a motion for leave to appeal when it is incompetent and there is no reason for it to depart.

Justice Ong dismissed the leave to appeal and ordered Zakir to pay RM30,000 in costs to Raveentharan.

On August last year, the Court of Appeal also allowed the preliminary objection raised by Raveentharan due to a non-compliance of a mandatory provision by Zakir's solicitors.

It was reported that Zakir's solicitors did not file a proper record of appeal to fulfill Rule 18 (6) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994. Kernail said then that the rule is obligatory and a mandatory provision which should be complied with.

Rule 18 (6) states that a draft index of the documents must be included in the record of appeal and sent by the appellant's solicitors to the solicitors for the respondent who or (if more than one) any of whom may within 48 hours object to the inclusion or exclusion of any document.

Zakir filed the defamation suit over five statements issued by Raveentharan whom the preacher claimed were made with malice, hatred and envy without first confirming the matter with him.

He is seeking an order to compel Raveentharan to remove the defamatory statements from websites, social media and all related mediums, as well as general, aggravated, exemplary damages and compensation, as well as other relief deemed fit by the court.

On July 23, 2021, the Kuala Lumpur High Court allowed Raveentharan's application to transfer the lawsuit to the Penang High Court for trial to be heard there.