LawChakra

Imputations Strike at My Honour and Womanhood: Priya Kapur Files Criminal Defamation Case Against Mandhira Kapur Smith

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Priya Kapur, wife of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, has filed a criminal defamation case in Delhi’s Patiala House Court against her sister-in-law Mandhira Kapur Smith, stating that such imputations strike at her honour, womanhood and social standing deeply.

Priya Kapur, the wife of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, has filed a criminal defamation case in Delhi’s Patiala House Court against her sister-in-law Mandhira Kapur Smith.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Siddhant Sihag of the Patiala House Courts heard the matter on Saturday and asked Priya Kapur to appear before the Court on January 21 for the recording of pre-summoning evidence.

Priya Kapur is engaged in a legal battle against Mandhira Kapur and other members of Sunjay Kapur’s family, including his second wife, actor Karisma Kapoor, over the control of Sunjay’s assets.

The criminal defamation case has been filed over statements made by Mandhira Kapur on social media platforms and in a podcast called In Controversial. Pooja Chaudhari, the host of the show, has also been made a party to the case.

In her complaint, Priya Kapur has argued that Mandhira Kapur repeatedly uploaded and circulated videos and posts on YouTube, Instagram, X (Twitter) and other platforms, which identify Priya Kapur by name and made “false allegations and accusatory insinuations designed to cause hatred, ridicule and social ostracism; thereby demolishing the reputation of the complainant in the eyes of the general public and in business circles”.

Further, the complaint states that in the podcast, Mandhira made repeated insinuations that Priya’s marriage with Sunjay was troubled, manipulative and undeserving of legitimacy.

The plea adds that such remarks directly attack the sanctity of her [Priya’s] marital relationship and lower her dignity as a wife and now a widow in the eyes of society.

 The plea has said,

“Such imputations strike at the very foundation of the Complainant’s honour, womanhood and social standing, and are therefore per se defamatory within the meaning of Section 356 BNS,”

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh appeared for Priya Kapur. The defamation case was filed through advocate Smriti Asmita.

Earlier, Priya Kapur, filed an appeal before theSupreme Court seeking certified copies of the 2016 divorce proceedings between Karisma and Sunjay Kapur.

The documents include details of the settlement concerning the care of their children.

Her application was submitted in late November, just three days before the High Court held an order on the injunction.

She submitted this request in November 2025, intending to obtain certified copies of the agreement that granted Karisma custody of their children, a flat in Mumbai, Rs.70 lakh in alimony, and bonds valued at Rs.14 crore for child support.

The Supreme Court of India issued a notice to Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor, requiring her to reply within two weeks to a petition filed by Priya Kapur, the widow of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur.

This development arises amid serious allegations of a forged will, with Sunjay’s children from his first marriage accusing Priya of trying to take control of his multi-million-dollar estate.

The terms of the settlement were confidential and only known to Karisma and Sunjay Kapur. The high-profile hearing in 2016 was conducted in the judge’s chambers, and the settlement was achieved amicably with mutual consent.

The Supreme Court recorded the “consent terms” agreed upon by both parties, which stipulated that the custody of their two children would be with Karisma Kapoor, while Sunjay would have access and visitation rights.

Following an in-chamber hearing led by Justices AK Sikri and RK Agrawal, Karisma’s advocate stated that all outstanding issues between the couple had been resolved amicably.

Currently, Karisma Kapoor’s children, Samaira and Kiaan Kapur, are in a dispute over inheritance following their father’s death in July of the previous year. Additionally, They have called for criminal action against Priya Kapur in the Supreme Court and have highlighted several inconsistencies in the “digital trail” of the will submitted by Priya Kapur in the Delhi High Court.

Background of the Case

The personal estate dispute of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur has been pending before the Delhi High Court for several months and forms the background to the ongoing inheritance battle within his family. The case involves conflicting claims by his widow, Priya Sachdev Kapur, his mother Rani Kapur, and his children from his earlier marriage with actor Karisma Kapoor, namely Samaira Kapur and Kiaan Raj Kapur.

The dispute began after Sunjay Kapur’s children and his mother approached the High Court alleging that the will relied upon by Priya Kapur was forged.

They challenged its validity and claimed that it does not reflect Sunjay Kapur’s true intentions regarding his multi-million-dollar personal estate. As part of the civil proceedings, they sought an interim injunction to prevent Priya Kapur from dealing with or managing the estate until the issue is finally decided.

During the hearings, Priya Kapur denied all allegations of forgery and concealment of assets, while Sunjay Kapur’s mother questioned the disclosure of his income and bank balances.

Previously, Priya Kapur’s son challenged the authenticity of the will purportedly belonging to their father, opposing the claims made by Karisma Kapoor’s children and asserting that their challenge was founded on “speculation and guesswork.”

Earlier, On November 20, Priya Kapur informed the High Court that it is a customary practice for a husband to leave all his assets to his wife, countering the assertion made by Karisma Kapoor’s children that their father’s alleged will emerged under questionable circumstances.

The High Court had previously allowed Priya Sachdev Kapur to file a list of Sunjay Kapur’s movable and immovable assets in a sealed envelope. Justice Jyoti Singh was reviewing her request to submit these asset details confidentially, along with a commitment that neither party would share this information with the media.



Exit mobile version