In Gurugram, on the 9th of November, Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Anil Kumar Yadav pronounced a significant judgment, ruling on the case involving 76-year-old Ms. Malti Bhatnagar. The verdict entailed a nine-month prison sentence and a fine of Rs 1,000. Notably, the delivery of this judgment occurred in the unconventional setting of the district court complex’s parking lot, a pragmatic decision owing to Ms. Bhatnagar’s postoperative physical limitations stemming from a recent knee surgery.
The legal grounds for Ms. Bhatnagar’s conviction rested upon a violation of Section 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code. Taking cognizance of her advanced age, the court, in its exercise of judicial discretion, determined an appropriate sentence, culminating in nine months of incarceration and the imposition of a financial penalty of Rs 1,000. Furthermore, recognizing the importance of due process, the court extended interim bail to Ms. Bhatnagar, allowing her the prerogative to pursue appellate remedies until the 8th of December.
This protracted legal imbroglio emanated from a longstanding dispute between Ms. Bhatnagar and Colonel Subhash Chander Talwar, an esteemed octogenarian resident. The genesis of their discord can be traced back to a parking altercation within the Ambience Island Lagoon Apartments in Gurugram dating back to 2015. Key legal milestones in this protracted feud include the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s dismissal of Ms. Bhatnagar’s prior First Information Report (FIR) against Colonel Talwar in January 2020. Subsequently, a civil court rendered a decision in favor of Colonel Talwar in January 2023, mandating Ms. Bhatnagar to remit a substantial sum of Rs 10 lakh in damages.
The roots of the acrimony can be traced to a real estate transaction wherein a segment of the parking area was conveyed to Ms. Bhatnagar’s husband. The ensuing disagreements, notably including allegations of intentional vehicular obstruction causing inconvenience, ultimately culminated in a criminal complaint filed by Colonel Talwar on the 2nd of February, 2016.
Colonel Subhash Chander Talwar, the complainant, alleged that Ms. Bhatnagar disseminated defamatory content against him within the residential colony’s WhatsApp group. Describing the incident, Talwar articulated, “On the 18th of October, exchanges occurred between the complainant and the accused, during which the accused employed abusive language. Subsequently, defamatory and insulting messages targeting the complainant were disseminated in the society’s WhatsApp group, with the evident intention of widespread circulation to the public, thereby besmirching my reputation,” as outlined in his criminal complaint.
Following this episode, on the 2nd of November, 2015, Talwar dispatched a legal notice to Ms. Bhatnagar, seeking redress for the alleged defamation. However, Ms. Bhatnagar refrained from responding to Talwar’s notice, and on the 8th of November, she initiated what Talwar characterizes as a “false FIR” against him. The FIR, lodged at the women’s Police Station in Sector 51, Gurugram, invoked various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage modesty), 354 A (unwelcome and explicit sexual behavior), 354B (assaults or use of criminal force on any woman with the intention of disrobing), 506 (criminal intimidation), 509 (sexual harassment by a relative), and 294 (sing, recite or utter any obscene song).
While the case was still under consideration in the Gurugram court, Talwar sought relief from the high court on the 11th of March, 2016, seeking the quashing of the FIR. The high court, in a judicious determination rendered on the 29th of January, 2020, concluded that a scrutiny of the FIR failed to disclose any criminal offense, leading to the quashing of the FIR.
