After more than a year of mud-slinging and a barrage of allegations between IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri (2009 batch) and IPS officer D Roopa Moudgil (2009 batch), a Bench of the Supreme Court had requested the two bureaucrats to explore a settlement, reminding them that they were “public functionaries” and should refrain from such conduct. However, to much despair, no such consensus was achieved. The fiasco boiled down to the extent that the Apex Court had to call for the records of a deposition made by IAS Sindhuri in a defamation complaint against IPS Moudgil.
In the SC’s order, dated May 15th, it is observed, “Notwithstanding the grant of time by this Court to the parties, they are not able to reconcile their differences. We direct the petitioner to place on record a copy of the deposition of the respondent recorded in the complaint.” The SC ordered the continuance of an interim stay granted on December 15th, 2023, on the criminal defamation proceedings brought by Officer Sindhuri against Officer Moudgil.
The contentious issue arose after they failed to resolve differences arising from allegedly defamatory remarks made by the women officers against each other. On February 21st (2023), Ms. Sindhuri issued a legal notice to Ms. D Roopa Moudgil and demanded an unconditional apology and Rs. 1 crore in damages for “the loss of her reputation and mental agony.”
On March 24th, a Bengaluru court, that was hearing the private suit filed by Ms. Sindhuri, ordered the initiation of a criminal defamation case against Ms. Moudgil, who then moved the High Court to have the same quashed. On August 21st, the Karnataka High Court rejected her plea.
High Court judge Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum observed that Officer Moudgil’s statements on her social media account and print media warranted a criminal trial. She then approached the apex court.
IAS officer Ms. Rohini Sindhuri was represented by senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, who told the court that attempts to resolve the conflict between the two female officers have failed. Additionally, advocate Sidharth Luthra told the court that the IPS officer makes press statements criticizing the IAS officer daily.
The Supreme Court had previously expressed its opinion on the matter, stating that such issues between public servants were best resolved between themselves and directing the IAS and IPS officers “to work out a solution which will be in the interest of both of them.”
