दैनिक भास्कर को यूपी के वकीलों ने बहुत तगड़ा मानहानि नोटिस भेजा है!

दैनिक भास्कर अखबार के द्वारा अपने वेबपेज पर अधिवक्ताओं के विषय में अभद्र और अपमानजनक छवि चित्रण प्रस्तुत करते हुए जो खबर लगाई गई है उसे खबर पर आज दैनिक भास्कर अखबार को मानहानि की नोटिस अधिवक्ता समाज की तरफ से दी जा रही है.

दैनिक भास्कर अखबार के ऊपर लगातार लूट ठगी और ब्लैकमेलिंग के संबंध में उत्तर प्रदेश के कई जिलों में प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट पंजीकृत हुई है और चुकी इस रिपोर्ट को पंजीकृत करने के प्रक्रिया में अधिवक्ता ही आगे आता है ऐसी स्थिति में दैनिक भास्कर अधिवक्ताओं की छवि को क्षति पहुंचाने के लिए इरादतन इस तरीके की खबर छाप रहा है.

LEGAL NOTICE (Date: 23/3/2026)

To,
The Editor-in-Chief
Dainik Bhaskar (Editorial Board)
Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Address 1: 1/55, Vineet Khand, Hindi Media Centre,
Viraj Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010, Uttar Pradesh

Address 2 (Bhaskar Prakashan): 16, Amar Stambh, Zone-1, Press Complex, Bhopal – 462011, Madhya Pradesh

Subject: Legal Notice for Defamation, Malicious and Misleading Publication, and Violation of Statutory & Ethical Norms

Sir/Madam,

I, Satyendra Nath Srivastava, Advocate, High Court, hereby serve upon you the present legal notice under instructions and on behalf of my client(s), members of the legal fraternity, as under:

1. That you have published and circulated a news report along with certain visuals concerning proceedings before the District Consumer Forum, Basti, wherein advocates have been depicted in a highly derogatory, misleading and scandalous manner. News link is https://www.bhaskar.com/…/basti-consumer-commission…
2. That the said visual portrayal of advocates in inappropriate and indecent form is false, fabricated, and deliberately sensationalized, having no relation to actual court decorum or professional conduct, and has been published with mala fide intent to malign the image of advocates.
3. That the impugned publication squarely falls within the ambit of defamation under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, as it contains imputations intended to harm the reputation of a definite class of persons, i.e., advocates, and is punishable under Section 500 IPC.
4. That the act of publishing distorted and objectionable digital content also attracts provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000, including but not limited to Sections 66 and 67.
5. That your publication is in clear violation of the Norms of Journalistic Conduct prescribed by the Press Council of India, which mandate fairness, accuracy, restraint, and prohibition of defamatory and sensational reporting.
6. That it is a settled principle that the legal profession is an indispensable pillar of the justice delivery system, and any attempt to scandalize or lower its dignity directly undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.
7. That the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Subramanian Swamy vs Union of India (2016), has upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation and emphasized the importance of protecting individual and professional reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
8. That further, in R. Rajagopal vs State of Tamil Nadu (1994), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly held that no person or entity has the right to publish anything which would harm the reputation of another without lawful justification.
9. That with regard to toll plaza-related incidents involving advocates, any observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court are case-specific and part of judicial adjudication. The same cannot be generalized or sensationalized to create a negative narrative against advocates as a class.
10. That your organization has indulged in selective and biased reporting, while there have been multiple instances where journalists associated with your establishment have allegedly been involved in acts of extortion, blackmail, coercive reporting, and monetary exploitation, with FIRs reported across various jurisdictions. Despite this, your publication has attempted to malign the legal fraternity.
11. That the impugned publication has caused grave and irreparable injury to the reputation, dignity, and professional standing of advocates, exposing them to public ridicule and contempt.
12. That such acts amount to:

• Criminal Defamation (Sections 499/500 IPC)
• Civil Defamation (Tortious Liability)
• Violation of IT Act, 2000
• Breach of Journalistic Ethics

Therefore, you are hereby called upon to:

a) Immediately remove the defamatory content, including all related visuals, from all platforms (print, digital, and social media);
b) Publish an unconditional public apology with the same prominence within 7 days from receipt of this notice;
c) Issue a clarification correcting the misleading and defamatory portrayal of advocates;
d) Cease and desist from publishing any such defamatory content in future;
e) Pay suitable compensation for the damage caused to the reputation of advocates.

Failing which, appropriate civil and criminal proceedings shall be initiated against you, including but not limited to actions under Sections 499/500 IPC, relevant provisions of the IT Act, 2000, a suit for damages, and proceedings before appropriate statutory authorities, at your entire risk as to cost and consequences. A copy of this notice is retained in my office for future use.

Satyendra Nath Srivastava
Advocate, High Court.