Archana Sahu v. Mehruddin Saifi

$~81 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 232/2026 ARCHANA SAHU .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, Advocate.

versus MEHRUDDIN SAIFI .....Respondent Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 12.01.2026 CRL.M.A. 863/2026 (exemption) Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed-of.

CRL.M.C. 232/2026 By way of the present petition filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner impugns order dated 02.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North-East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in Crl. Rev. No.10/2025.

2.

The petitioner had filed a complaint under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 alleging offences against the respondent under sections 499/500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for causing defamation.

3.

Before the learned trial court, the petitioner produced only one witness-namely herself; and the learned trial court dismissed the CRL.M.C. 232/2026 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/01/2026 at 12:50:05

complaint after recording pre-summoning evidence of CW-1, viz. the petitioner herself.

4.

The learned trial court held, that in order to make-out a prima-facie case of defamation, the petitioner (complainant) ought to have examined some other person as a witness, in whose estimation the complainant's image had fallen or was harmed. 5.

The learned trial court accordingly declined to issue summons to the respondent; and dismissed the complaint vide order dated 30.01.2023. 6.

Order dated 30.01.2023 was challenged by the petitioner by way of a criminal revision petition, bearing Crl. Rev. No.10/2025, which has been dismissed on the ground of delay.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that defamation is a continuing offence; and, given a chance, the petitioner would produce other witnesses to support her plea of defamation. 8.

After making brief submissions, counsel seeks leave to withdraw the present petition, with liberty to file afresh on any alleged continuing cause of action, as may be permissible, in accordance with law. 9.

The petition is accordingly disposed-of as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed-for.

10.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

JANUARY 12, 2026/ak CRL.M.C. 232/2026 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/01/2026 at 12:50:05