38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, January 13, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Criminal Defamation Case Against Advocate Prashant Bhushan Transferred to Patiala House Court

By LawStreet News Network      10 February, 2020 10:02 PM      0 Comments
Criminal Defamation Case Against Advocate Prashant Bhushan Transferred to Patiala House Court

The Supreme Court on February 10, 2020 transferred the Criminal Defamation case against Advocate Prashant Bhushan from Rohtak in Haryana to Delhi Patiala House Court. Yesterday (9 February, 2020) Bhushan moved the Supreme Court seeking transfer of Criminal Defamation case from Haryana to Delhi.

Bhushan claimed that the case is only a Vindictive action against him by Indiabulls to keep him quiet so that he cannot highlight the illegalities of the company.

Indiabulls filed the case in Rohtak, Haryana before Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class for publishing a defamatory content on social media platform like- Instagram, Twitter and Facebook to damage their goodwill.

Bhushan further contended in his transfer petition that Indiabulls is doing this to harass him as he is the signing authority and the Secretary of Citizens at the Whistle Blowers Forum that has filed a PIL (WPC 9887/2019) before the Delhi High Court to seek illegalities exercised and violations committed by Indiabulls.

Bhushan has submitted that he is a practicing Advocate in Delhi High Court and  travelling to Haryana is more or less inconvenient and causing him undue difficulty.

Citing further instances Bhushan said-intimidatory legal tactics to overawe and silence those who highlight illegalities and irregularities in the conduct of its business so as to dissuade scrutiny.

Defamation under Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 499 defines Defamation.Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that person. Explanation 1.It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives.

Explanation 2.It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such. 

Explanation 3.An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation. 

Explanation 4.No imputation is said to harm a persons reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.

Section 500 prescribes the punishment for defamation.whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

In India, Defamation can be viewed as a civil offence as well as criminal offence and may be defined as the writing, publication and speaking of a false statement which causes injury to reputation and good will for private interest. The remedy for a civil defamation is covered under the Law of Torts.

 

Author: Aarya Mishra



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

ai-judges-the-future-of-algorithmic-decision-making-in-courts
Trending Vantage Points
“AI Judges” The Future of Algorithmic Decision-Making in Courts

Can algorithms deliver justice? This article explores AI judges, constitutional challenges, ethical risks, global models, and India’s cautious path forward.

12 January, 2026 07:07 PM

TOP STORIES

borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM
leela-palace-udaipur-ordered-to-pay-10-lakh-after-housekeeping-staff-enters-occupied-room-without-consent
Trending Business
Leela Palace Udaipur Ordered to Pay ₹10 Lakh After Housekeeping Staff Enters Occupied Room Without Consent [Read Order]

Chennai Consumer Commission orders Leela Palace Udaipur to pay ₹10 lakh and refund room tariff for breach of guest privacy by housekeeping staff.

07 January, 2026 09:43 PM
sc-strikes-down-bihars-midway-change-in-recruitment-rules-for-assistant-engineers
Trending Judiciary
SC Strikes Down Bihar’s Midway Change in Recruitment Rules for Assistant Engineers [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules recruitment criteria cannot be changed midway, strikes down Bihar’s retrospective amendment granting weightage to contractual engineers.

07 January, 2026 10:03 PM
only-light-and-not-any-fight-madras-hc-upholds-single-judges-order-allowing-lighting-of-lamps-on-deepathoon
Trending Judiciary
Only Light And Not Any Fight: Madras HC Upholds Single Judge’s Order Allowing Lighting Of Lamps On Deepathoon [Read Judgment]

Madras High Court upholds order allowing lighting of Karthigai Deepam at Deepathoon, rejecting public order objections and dismissing 20 appeals.

07 January, 2026 10:57 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email