On December 15, the Supreme Court intervened in the ongoing criminal defamation case that was initiated by IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri against an IPS officer D Roopa Moudgil.
The court, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal thereupon, issued a temporary halt to the proceedings and instructed both senior civil servants from Karnataka, including the involved parties, to refrain from engaging with the media.
The decision came as a response to Moudgil's appeal against the Karnataka High Court's ruling in August, which had refused to dismiss the criminal defamation case filed by Sindhuri. The roots of the dispute trace back to February 18 when Moudgil accused Sindhuri, via Facebook posts, of sharing her private pictures with fellow IAS officers. The public exchange of accusations resulted in both officers being transferred by the State government.
On February 21, Sindhuri took legal action by serving a notice to Moudgil, seeking an unconditional apology and ₹1 crore in damages for alleged harm to her reputation and mental distress. Subsequently, on March 24, a Bengaluru court directed the initiation of a criminal defamation case against Moudgil, leading her to appeal to the High Court, which, on August 21, rejected her plea.
The Supreme Court, recognizing the high ranks of the involved officials, recommended mediation on December 13, expressing concerns about public conflicts tarnishing the administration's image. Justice Oka advised against mudslinging and, on December 14, proposed that Moudgil remove all social media posts against Sindhuri and issue an apology to potentially resolve the matter. The bench emphasized that continuing a public dispute could disrupt the State administration.
On December 15, the Supreme Court reviewed an affidavit submitted by Moudgil, containing an undertaking to remove all social media posts against Sindhuri. The court acknowledged this step as an interim measure and, not as a specific order, decided to stay the defamation proceedings. The court's intervention aims to facilitate a resolution in the ongoing dispute between the senior officers.
Case: D ROOPA Petitioner(s) vs ROHINI SINDHURI
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 43749/2023.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy