HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
Brij Raj Singh, J.
Smt. Sadhana Chooramani @ Sadhana Bedi – Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another – Respondent
Application U/S 482 No. - 3475 of 2026, Application U/S 482 No. - 3679 of 2026, Application U/S 482 No. - 3477 of 2026
Decided On : 21-05-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of multiple defamation complaint cases against the applicant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments challenging criminal defamation summons on grounds of proxy filing and double jeopardy. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 3. arguments opposing the discharge/quashing of criminal proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. judicial precedents defining defamation and the estimation of others under section 499 ipc. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 5. failure to meet statutory requirements due to internal employee status of witnesses. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. quashing of the impugned summoning orders and criminal proceedings. (Para 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
1. Since the common question of facts and law are involved in all three applications, therefore, with the consent of the parties, they are being heard and decided by a common judgement.
2. The applicant/Smt. Sadhana Chooramani alias Sadhana Bedi in seeking setting aside of summoning order dated 25.03.2019 in Complaint Case No.2668 of 2018 (Pyarelal Shukla Vs. Sadhna Bedi & Ors.), under Sections 500, 501 of Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”), pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Lucknow (for short “Magistrate”).
3. The applicants i.e. Smt. Sadhana Chooramani alias Sadhana Bedi and Rajesh Agarwal alias Rajesh Kumar Agarwal, respectively, in APPLICATION U/s 482 Nos. 3477 and 3679 of 2026 have filed the applications seeking setting aside of summoning order dated 31.07.2019 in Complaint Case No.2565 of 2018 (Surendra Kumar Verma Vs. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors.), under Sections 500, 501 of IPC, pending in the Court of the Magistrate.
4. The facts of APPLICATION U/s 482 Nos. 3475 of 2026 are extracted herein-below.
The complainant filed a complaint stating therein that he was employed as a typist at City Montessori School, Station Road Branch, Lucknow (for short “CMS”), and that several persons, being jealous of the reputation of Shri Jagdish Gandhi (since deceased) on account of better education and discipline imparted by the institution, conspired to malign the image of CMS and its founder, Dr. Jagdish Gandhi. It has been alleged that Rajesh Agrawal, Ritesh Agrawal, Dr. Sunil Bisen, and Sandeep Pandey, had, even prior to the present incident, distributed pamphlets to defame CMS and its founder and had also staged demonstrations. It has further been alleged that, in order to create terror and defile the image of the school and Shri Jagdish Gandhi, on 18.08.2018, after sending an e-mail, Sandeep Pandey asked his supporters to hold demonstrations before CMS. Pursuant thereto, the supporters allegedly held demonstrations and distributed pamphlets. The statements of the complainant and the witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”). Thereafter, the Magistrate summoned the applicants to face trial vide the impugned order dated 25.03.2019.
5. The facts of APPLICATION U/s 482 Nos. 3477 and 3679 of 2026 are related to each other and have arisen out of same complaint case which are mentioned below.
The complainant filed a complaint stating therein that he was employed as an Office Secretary at CMS. It has been alleged that Rajesh Agrawal, Ritesh Agrawal, Dr. Sunil Bisen, and Sandeep Pandey had, even prior to the present incident, distributed pamphlets to malign the image of CMS and its founder, Dr. Jagdish Gandhi, and had also staged demonstrations. It has further been alleged that, in order to create terror and defame the school and Shri Jagdish Gandhi, on 18.08.2018 and 25.08.2018, after sending an e-mail, Sandeep Pandey asked his supporters to hold demonstrations before CMS. Pursuant thereto, the supporters allegedly held demonstrations and distributed pamphlets. The statements of the complainant and the witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC. Thereafter, the Magistrate summoned the applicants to face trial vide order dated 31.07.2019.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of exception 8 to Section 499 of the IPC, emphasizing the need for good faith and lawful authority in making accusations and the....
The judgment establishes the importance of specific averments in a complaint, compliance with the mandatory provisions of Cr.P.C., and the necessity of conducting an inquiry before issuing process.
The trial Court must conduct a sufficient inquiry under Section 202 before summoning an accused for defamation, ensuring no abuse of process occurs.
Intent to harm is necessary for establishing defamation under Indian Penal Code, and good faith expressions in a cooperative society's governance are protected from such allegations.
Publication of true statements related to official proceedings cannot constitute defamation under IPC Section 500.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mens rea for defamation and the importance of considering material placed on record to prevent the abuse of the process of th....
The court has the power to review and set aside orders if they are found to be illegal or based on no evidence.
(1) Defamation – ”BJP” is a determinate and identifiable body and complaint for defamation under Section 500 IPC is maintainable.(2) Defamation – Right of a person against whom offence of defamation ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.