The Bombay High Court cancelled a criminal defamation notice issued to HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan, calling it premature and illegal. The Court clarified the proper procedure under the new criminal laws before such notices can be issued.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MAHARASHTRA: The Bombay High Court cancelled a criminal defamation notice that was issued by a Mumbai magistrate against HDFC Bank’s Managing Director and CEO, Sashidhar Jagdishan, in a case filed by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust.
The High Court ruled that the notice was issued too early and without following the proper legal procedure under the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
The defamation complaint was filed on June 16, 2025, before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Girgaon, by the Lilavati Trust through its permanent trustee, Prashant Mehta.
In the complaint, the Trust accused Jagdishan and others of offences under Sections 356(1) (defamation), 356(2), 356(3), and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The Trust claimed that HDFC Bank and Jagdishan had intentionally damaged the reputation of the Trust through press releases. Apart from this criminal case, a civil defamation suit is already pending before the Bombay High Court.
Jagdishan approached the High Court challenging the trial court’s order of issuing the notice. He argued that the magistrate had issued the notice on the very same day the complaint was filed, without conducting the legal verification process.
The Bombay High Court examined the matter and found that the notice was indeed issued without recording the complainant’s sworn verification—a step which is mandatory before a magistrate can proceed with a criminal complaint.
Justice SM Modak, ruling in favour of Jagdishan, observed that the notice had been issued at the wrong stage.
The Court said:
“If we consider the chronology, it shows that after filing of complaint there has to be verification of the complainant and witnesses and when prior to decision on taking cognizance is taken, the accused needs to be heard. Hearing the accused cannot be interpreted prior to recording the verification and the statement of witnesses if any.”
The lawyers for the Lilavati Trust argued that the magistrate had not yet taken cognizance of the case, and therefore, was allowed to issue notice before doing so. They also referred to a proviso to Section 223, BNSS, saying that the accused must be heard before cognizance can be taken.
The Court disagreed with this argument and explained that both the main section and the proviso of Section 223 must be understood together.
The Court clarified:
“Ultimately this proviso is nothing but an exception to what is stated in opening part of Section 223. It is the one of the principle of interpretation that ‘the main provision and the proviso’ has to be read together.”
Another argument from the Trust’s side was that Jagdishan, having already appeared before the magistrate and spoken in court, was not allowed to later challenge the notice.
Rejecting this, the High Court said:
“There cannot be estoppel against the party if they insist on adherence to provisions of law.”
Finally, the Court ruled in favour of Jagdishan and held:
“The order of issuance of notice to proposed accused dated 16th June 2025 is quashed and set aside.”
However, the High Court gave liberty to the magistrate to restart the process after properly recording the verification of the complaint and witnesses.
- Senior Advocates Ravi Kadam and Sudeep Passbola, with Advocates Sandeep Singhi, Chandan Singh Shekhawat, Sanskruti Harode, and Rohin Chauhan, instructed by Parinam Law Associates, appeared for Jagdishan.
- Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda, with Advocates Monish Bhatia, Hemant Ingle, Minal Chandnani, Jyoti Ghag, and Ankit Singhal, instructed by Dua Associates, represented the Lilavati Trust.
- For the State, Additional Public Prosecutor NB Patil appeared before the Court.
CASE TITLE:
Sashidhar Jagdishan vs State of Maharashtra
WP/3205/2025
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
