Delhi’s Saket court summons Samir Kumar Modi in Godfrey Phillips defamation case

Additional Sessions Judge Sheetal Chaudhary Pradhan ordered the court to reject the complaint of May 19 and led the lower court to call Modi.

“Considering the facts and conditions of this case and at the same time the application of the case -law, the current revision petition of 19.05.2025, which was adopted by the court booths learned, was allowed to call the defendant/plaintiff and progress further than the law.

Board of Directors conflict

The dispute stems from a meeting room conflict in the GPI in May 2024 and claims that he was attacked by modest. Independent directors Atul Kumar Gupta and Nirmala Bagri accuse them of slander by claiming that they consent to the alleged attack. Other independent directors Lalit Bhasin, Ajay Vohra, Avtar Singh Monga, Sumant Bharadwaj and Subramanian lakshminarayanan.

Late Business King KK Modi, the youngest of the three children Modi-and former IPL chief Lalit Modi and Sun Charu Modi’s brother was removed from the board of directors on August 7, 2024.

Lalit Samir, Godfrey Phillips Board of Directors chaired the mother building moded.

Samir was removed from the board of directors last year, while the building Modi was re -elected as the chairman and general manager of the company.

Samir accused members of the Board of Directors of organizing an attack in May last year while trying to attend a lock board meeting.

Slander case

According to the complaint, before a board of directors planned on 30 May 2024, an audit committee meeting continued. Modi, a general manager at the time, but was not a member of the committee, was claimed to have entered a fiery discussion with a security guard outside the meeting room.

To avoid the deduction, the senior board members invited him, shouting angrily as allegedly, and hit the folders on the table. Despite the incident, the meeting ended and Modi later attended the board meeting without a sign of injury.

Later on 1 June 2024, the Economic Times published an interview that Modi claimed to have arranged a “planned attack” to prevent complaints and other members of the board of directors from attending the meeting.

The directors refuse to accuse by referring to CCTV images that show Modi as aggressive, and claim that the explanations are wrong, scandalous and aim to harm their reputation.

They say that Smir Modi’s statements have created a wrong impression because they condemn or organize an attack and cause social, professional and reputation damage to them who want them to approach the court.

The complaint of slander under the 499 and 500th chapters of the Indian Penal Code was opened in November 2024.

The court was dismissed in May 2025 and asked the executives to ask for revision before the session court.

Sessions Court’s findings

The session court said that the economic Times meeting contained harmful allegations to complainants who can easily be defined as public figures and members of the board of directors of a well -known company.

The complainants presented the article a 65B certificate and called the reporter witness. The court also observed that insult can be directed to defined groups such as members of the board of directors of a company. He decided that the court had decided that the court had sufficient reasons for the dismissal of the existence of other cases and assuming that there was the opportunity to present his witnesses to the complainants.

Chapter 65b allows E -Posts, scanned copies or web pages to be accepted as evidence in the court provided that they come with a certificate confirming their originality and how they are produced.