New Delhi, February 12 A Delhi court has summoned industrialist Bina Modi and senior lawyer Lalit Bhasin in connection with the alleged assault of Godfrey Philips India (GPI) executive director Samir Modi during a board meeting in 2024.
Judicial Magistrate Aneeza Bishnoi took cognizance of the offences in the charge sheet and issued summons to all three accused, including Bina Modi's personal security officer Surendra Prasad, who allegedly assaulted Samir Modi.
Police filed a charge sheet on March 1, 2025, naming Prasad as an accused with sufficient prima facie material.
However, it did not find enough evidence to prosecute Bina Modi and Bhasin. Samir Modi then filed a protest petition seeking cognizance against them as well.
According to the prosecution, on May 30, 2024, Samir Modi went to the GPI office to attend a board meeting as executive director. He alleged that Prasad stopped him from entering the boardroom on Bina Modi's instructions and assaulted him when he insisted on attending.
The complaint stated that his right index finger was broken and required surgical intervention with the insertion of a screw and wire. The medico-legal certificate described the injury as grievous. CCTV footage of the incident was also part of the material collected.
Samir Modi further alleged that when he informed Bina Modi about the assault, she asked him to sit down and allow the meeting to proceed, and that Bhasin also insisted that the meeting continue despite his injuries.
"It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that while acting under Section 210 of the BNSS (cognizance of offences by magistrates), the court takes cognizance of the offence and not the accused. Therefore, the court is not constrained by the opinion of the Investigating Officer as reflected in the charge sheet," the court said in its February 10 order.
The court rejected the investigating officer's claim that Samir Modi was not duly invited, observing, "However, this response from the IO is not acceptable, as even if we consider that the complainant was not invited, causing a grievous injury to the complainant in order to prevent that from happening is unlawful."
The court also noted contradictions in Prasad's statement and the CCTV footage collected. It said that involvement in conspiracy or common intention can be inferred from the circumstances.
"Furthermore, it is a matter for trial, and it is for the prosecution to present evidence and prove the allegations against the accused, and for the defense to counter them. The Investigating Officer cannot be the deciding authority in a case that he is investigating, especially based on the statement of one of the accused that the other accused persons have not committed any offence," the court said, finding sufficient prima facie material against Bina Modi and Bhasin.
Allowing the protest petition, the court said, "At the stage of taking cognizance, a meticulous evaluation of evidence is neither warranted nor permissible, and the material on record, though circumstantial, forms a prima facie chain pointing towards a meeting of minds between the accused persons, which is sufficient at this stage to proceed with the trial."
The matter is listed for the appearance of the accused on May 7.