Delhi HC Dismisses Assault Allegations Filed by Samir Modi Against Bina Modi, Two Others

New Delhi, Apr 28 : The Delhi High Court on Monday brought an end to the high-profile Samir Modi assault case, quashing criminal proceedings against industrialist Bina Modi, her personal security guard Surendra Prasad, and senior advocate Lalit Bhasin. The decision followed the withdrawal of the complaint by her son, Samir Modi, effectively closing a contentious legal dispute that had its roots in a corporate boardroom incident in 2024.

Court Accepts Withdrawal, Ends Proceedings
The matter was heard by Justice Saurabh Banerjee, who recorded the complainant’s decision to withdraw allegations. Appearing via video conferencing, Samir Modi informed the court that he no longer wished to pursue the case.
Taking note of the settlement between the parties, the court issued a brief but decisive order, stating “quashed,” thereby terminating all proceedings pending before the trial court. The ruling also rendered earlier summons issued by the Saket court redundant.

Background: Dispute During Board Meeting
The case stemmed from an incident on May 30, 2024, at the office of Godfrey Phillips India. At the time, Samir Modi was serving as executive director and had arrived to attend a board meeting.
According to the complaint, he was allegedly prevented from entering the boardroom by security personnel acting on instructions. When he insisted on attending, an altercation reportedly took place, leading to physical injury.
Samir claimed that his right index finger was fractured during the incident, requiring surgical intervention involving medical implants. The injury was classified as grievous in official medical documentation, and investigators collected CCTV footage as part of the evidence.

Allegations Against Family and Associates
In his complaint, Samir further alleged that after informing his mother about the incident, she did not intervene and instead allowed the meeting to proceed. Similar claims were made regarding Lalit Bhasin, who was present at the time.
These allegations formed the basis of the FIR registered in June 2024, which led to a detailed police investigation.

Police Findings and Legal Developments
On March 1, 2025, investigators filed a charge sheet identifying Surendra Prasad as the primary accused in the alleged assault. However, both Bina Modi and Lalit Bhasin were not prosecuted at that stage due to insufficient evidence.
Dissatisfied with the findings, Samir Modi approached the trial court with a protest petition. The judicial magistrate, after reviewing the material on record, observed that there was prima facie evidence suggesting possible involvement of the other accused. The court noted that elements of common intention or conspiracy could not be ruled out at that stage.
Summons were subsequently issued, directing the accused to appear before the court in May 2026.

Settlement Changes Legal Course
The trajectory of the case shifted after both sides reached an out-of-court settlement. Following this, Samir Modi formally withdrew his complaint, paving the way for the petitioners to approach the high court for quashing of proceedings.
The Delhi High Court, exercising its inherent powers, accepted the settlement and concluded that continuation of the case would serve no purpose once the complainant had retracted his allegations.

Implications of the Ruling
The quashing of the Samir Modi assault case underscores how settlements can significantly influence criminal proceedings, particularly in disputes arising from personal or corporate conflicts.
With the court’s order, all allegations against the three individuals stand legally nullified, bringing closure to a dispute that had drawn attention due to its intersection of family dynamics and corporate governance.

Conclusion: Dispute Ends, Legal Chapter Closes
The decision marks the end of a prolonged legal battle involving prominent business figures. By accepting the withdrawal and settlement, the Delhi High Court has effectively closed the case, allowing all parties to move forward without further litigation.
The development highlights the role of reconciliation in resolving complex disputes, even those that initially escalate into criminal litigation.