The Patiala Court in Delhi has issued a notice to industrialist Sunjay Kapur’s sister, Mandhira Kapur Smith, based on a defamation suit filed by his wife, Priya Kapur. This comes days after Priya had filed a case against Mandhira, citing ‘serious reputational harm’. The notice was issued to Sunjay’s sister on Wednesday, with Priya’s lawyer claiming that Mandhira had previously also taken Sunjay to court.
Delhi court issues legal notice to Sunjay Kapur’s sister
After finding sufficient grounds to proceed in the criminal defamation complaint filed by Priya under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the court issued a notice to Mandhira on Wednesday. The matter is now listed for appearance on March 12, with Mandhira called to appear in court on that date.
Priya Kapur’s defamation suit against Mandhira Kapur Smith
The notice follows Priya’s appearance before the court to lead pre-summoning evidence during which she placed documentary material. The complaint alleged that a ‘sustained and coordinated campaign’ of defamatory statements was made by Mandhira in television interviews, podcasts and digital media platforms. Priya claimed that these were ‘direct imputations’ on her ‘integrity, professional competence, legitimacy’.
It was highlighted in court that the timing of these alleged attacks coincided with the death of Sunjay, and while Priya was grieving his death. Mandhira is alleged to have launched public attacks against her, with the complaint characterising it as ‘deliberate, malicious and calculated’ to cause reputational harm at a moment of vulnerability.
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, who appeared on Priya’s behalf, also told the court that this was not the first time Mandhira had allegedly done this. He alleged that she had previously targeted her brother, Sunjay, and had initiated litigation against his company to stall its IPO. The dispute back then had reached the Supreme Court and had ended in Sunjay’s favour.
Opposing side not genuinely challenging will, claims advocate
Verbatim transcripts, recorded interviews, podcasts, published articles and digital content were submitted with the complaint as proof of defamatory statements. At the pre-summoning stage, the court examined whether these were essential for the defamation suit without recording a finding of guilt. Advocate Singh also addressed the will dispute, stating that it complies with all legal requirements, including the presence of an executor and two witnesses. He stated that the opposite side is ‘not genuinely’ challenging the validity of the will but ‘raising peripheral issues’.
