Delhi court summons industrialist Bina Modi in alleged assault case on GPI executive director

New Delhi: A Delhi court has summoned industrialist Bina Modi and senior lawyer Lalit Bhasin in connection with an 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 had 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 Prasad stopped him from entering the boardroom on Bina Modi's instructions and assaulted him when he insisted on attending.

The complaint said his right index finger was broken and required surgical intervention with 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 the meeting continue despite his injuries.

"It is settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that while acting u/s 210 BNSS (cognizance of offences by magistrates), the court takes cognizance of the offence and not the accused. Hence, 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 reply of IO is not acceptable to the effect that even if for once we are to consider that the complainant was not invited, causing a grievous injury to the complainant in order to stop that from happening is unlawful." The court also noted contradictions in Prasad's statement and the CCTV footage collected. It said involvement in conspiracy or common intention can be inferred from circumstances.

"Further, it is a matter of trial and for the prosecution to lead evidence and to prove the allegations levelled against the accused persons and for the defence to counter them. The Investigating Officer cannot be a deciding authority in a case that he is investigating, that too on the basis of 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 appearance of the accused on May 7.