The Delhi High Court has stayed further proceedings in a criminal defamation case initiated by BJP IT Cell head Shri Amit Malviya against Santanu Sinha, holding that the complainant remains bound by an undertaking earlier given to the Court.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani issued notice on an application filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking enforcement of an undertaking recorded in the Court’s earlier order dated March 3, 2025. The petitioner had sought restraint on the complainant from pressing further proceedings in Criminal Complaint pending before the trial court.
The case arose from social media posts made by the petitioner on Facebook in June and August 2024, concerning the complainant. During earlier proceedings, the petitioner undertook to take down the posts in order to “put a quietus to the dispute,” which was duly recorded by the High Court. It was also recorded that the complainant had verified that all three posts had been taken down.
In view of the takedown, respondent No. 2 (Amit Malviya) had given a categorical undertaking before the High Court that he would seek an adjournment before the trial court and request that the hearing in the defamation complaint be fixed for a date after the High Court matter. The petitioner was also exempted from personal appearance before the trial court until further orders.
The petitioner subsequently approached the High Court contending that, despite the undertaking, the complainant was continuing to press the defamation complaint, resulting in the trial court observing that there was “no stay” on the proceedings. It was argued that the complainant was reneging on the assurance given to the High Court.
Opposing the application, counsel for the complainant submitted that the petitioner had published a subsequent Facebook post dated August 30, 2025, which was allegedly derogatory. The petitioner disputed the allegation and the correctness of the English translation of the post produced by the complainant.
Taking note of the submissions, the High Court directed the petitioner to file what he claims to be the correct English translation of the subsequent post and granted time for filing replies and rejoinders.
Significantly, the Court directed that in the meantime, respondent No. 2 shall remain bound by the undertaking recorded in paragraphs 3.1 and 4 of the order dated March 3, 2025, effectively staying further progress in the defamation proceedings. The Court also clarified that since the matter arises out of a private defamation complaint under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the State has no role in the dispute.
The matter has been re-notified for further hearing on March 19, 2026.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, Ms. Amrita Sarkar, Mr. Yashwardhan Singh, Mr. Amit Haldar, Mr. Amit Kumar Roy, Ms. Harshita Rawat and Mr. Alli Abbas Masoodi, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State.
SI Rahul, Tughlak Road
Mr. Siddharth Dutta, Mr. Pratyush Singh and Mr. Kardarp Raj Dipankar, Advocates for R-2.
