2026:BHC-OS:6104 Ajay IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.37218 OF 2025 IN SUIT (L) NO.37043 OF 2025 Sanu Bhattacharjee @ Kumar Sanu .. Plaintiff Versus Rita Bhattacharya and Ors. .. Defendants ....................



Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w Mr. Haider Tapia, Advocates for Plaintiff.



Mr. Malcolm Siganporiya and Mr. Avesh Ganja i/by Satyaki Law Associates, Advocates for Defendant No. 1 

Ms. Amishi Sodani, Advocate i/by Ms. Charu Shukla, Advocates for Defendant No.2.



Mr. Ameya Gokhale a/w Ms. Richa Bharti and Mr. Rishab Jaisani, Mr. Harit Lakhani and Mr. Abhishek Mookherjee i/by Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co., Advocates for Defendant No.3.

...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : MARCH 04, 2026.

P. C . :

1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for Plaintiff; Mr. Siganporiya, learned Advocate for Defendant No. 1; Ms. Sodani, learned Advocate for Defendant No. 2 and Mr. Gokhale, learned Advocate for Defendant No. 3. Interim Application (L) No.37218 of

2025 is disposed of by this order.

2. Suit (L) No.37043 of 2025 is filed by Plaintiff for defamation and damages. In the Suit, present Interim Application is filed for interim reliefs. It has been fully argued before me. Interim Application is disposed of by this order. Parties are referred to as “Plaintiff” and “Defendants” for convenience.

3. By order dated 21.01.2026, after hearing the parties this Court allowed prayer clauses “a” and “b” in the Interim Application (L) No.37218 of 2025. The order is reproduced below for immediate reference:-

“1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for Plaintiff; Mr. Shaikh, learned Advocate for Defendant No.1; Ms. Sodani, learned Advocate for Defendant No.2 and Mr. Jaisani, learned Advocate for Defendant No.3.

2. Ms. Khan has drawn my attention to the Interim Application. Today pursuant to the previous order dated 16.01.2026, Mr. Shaikh appears on behalf of Defendant No.1. Equally, other Defendants are duly represented before me.

3. After hearing Ms. Khan and perusing the grievance towards the contentious part of the posts and / or interviews which are listed in paragraph Nos. 7.1 to 7.13 and 8.1 to 8.23, Mr. Shaikh would submit that he be permitted to file Affidavit-in-Reply thereto.

4. However he in his usual fairness persuades the Court on instructions to consider sending the parties to Mediation especially in view of the fact that son of Defendant No.1 and Plaintiff has recently got wedded and hence he would request the Court that if parties are referred to Mediation then it will sub-serve the interest of both parties. While acknowledging the request made by Mr. Shaikh, I have made it apparently clear to him with respect to the case made out by Plaintiff in paragraph Nos. 7.1 to 7.13 and 8.1 to 8.23 of the Interim Application that his client will have to immediately restrain herself and ensure that there is no further reputational damage caused any further and no further insinuations are spoken by her about / against the Plaintiff.

5. Prima facie, after going through the same, I am of the opinion that at some places in the interviews which have been given by Defendant No.1 there is a clear personal tirade against Plaintiff which is prima facie qualified by words that are used therein.

6. Considering the fact that Plaintiff and Defendant No.1 were married for a long time but equally considering the fact that they having being legally separated more than 32 years ago is one of the most crucial factor which needs to be applied to the case made out by Ms. Khan if the contentious words / sentences appearing in the interview / transcripts placed before Court in the aforementioned paragraph Nos. 7.1 to 7.13 and 8.1 to 8.23 are to be considered and hence Court will undoubtedly have to step in.

7. Be that as it may, I have also equally requested Ms. Khan to take appropriate instructions as to whether Plaintiff is also agreeable to go for Mediation without prejudice to his rights and conten