Therefore, he filed the counter affidavit seeking a direction from the court to vacate the interim injunction granted in favor of the plaintiff/Senthilbalaji.

“Plaintiff has miserably failed to establish a prima-facie case of defamation. Except for making mere denials with respect to the allegations against him, Plaintiff has failed to come clean on any of them. I submit that the balance of convenience is entirely in my favor in as much as an interim injunction seriously curtails my fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression,” the defendant said in his counter-affidavit.

He further submitted that the plaintiff holds the excise and prohibition department but the increase in liquor consumption in the state is a matter of grave concern.

“The plaintiff is an active abettor. Instead of coming forward with a policy to regulate alcohol consumption and make liquor sales more transparent, the plaintiff is bent on silencing critics so that he can go on with his illegal activities uninterrupted,” he added.