Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Pantomath Capital Advisors Pvt Ltd vs Unknown Person (John Doe)
2026 Latest Caselaw 1004 Bom

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1004 Bom
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Pantomath Capital Advisors Pvt Ltd vs Unknown Person (John Doe) on 29 January, 2026

Author: Milind N. Jadhav
Bench: Milind N. Jadhav
                                                                                    P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
      (P.A.)
                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                            ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION


                                        SUIT (L) NO.34088 OF 2025
                                                  WITH
                                INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.34091 OF 2025

              Pantomath Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd.              .. Plaintiff
                         Versus
              Unknown Person (John Doe) and Ors.                .. Defendants
                                           ....................
               Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w. Ms. Tejal Patel and Mr. Rahul
                 Singh, Advocates for Plaintiff.
                                                      ...................

                                                     CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                                     DATE          : JANUARY 29, 2026
              P.C.:

1. Not on Board. Mentioned by way of filing praecipe dated

29.01.2026. Perused the praecipe.

2. Heard Dr. Chandrachud, learned Advocate for Plaintiff.

3. Plaintiff has filed present Suit seeking immediate indulgence

of the Court in respect of reliefs prayed for under the provisions of

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act,

2000 against private Defendants namely Defendant No.1. Defendant

No.1 is John Doe / Ashok Kumar contemplated and identified in the

Suit plaint through various emails created through Proton AG

website / Application originating from beyond the territorial

jurisdiction of this Country. Defendant No.1 has addressed several

emails to Plaintiff and Securities and Exchange Board of India (for

1 of 6

P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

short 'SEBI') (to the knowledge of Plaintiff) contending that he is a

whistle blower and has communicated, published, distributed various

defamatory, threatening, false and malicious allegations concerning

working of the Plaintiff - Company, its management, its operations and

its operations and functioning with SEBI.

4. To buttress the case of Plaintiff Dr. Chandrachud has drawn

my attention to the first email dated 16.08.2025 appended at page

No.23 of the Suit plaint followed by subsequent emails dated

16.09.2025 appended at page No.25 and 15.10.2025 appended at

page No.28. Prima facie perusing contents of these emails, it is seen

that contents of same prima facie threaten the Plaintiff and its

activities as also maliciously malign the reputation of the Plaintiff -

Company. The emails are not substantiated at all. These emails are

also endrosed to SEBI as can be seen from the record of the case.

5. Defendant No.1 does not stop at this only. Dr. Chandrachud

has draw my attention to page No.31 which are transcripts of

whatsapp messages which are sent on whatsapp Application / website

to the Managing Directors / Directors of Plaintiff.

6. Prima facie, reading of the said material shows the malicious

tirade embarked upon by Defendant No.1 accusing Plaintiff - Company

of committing fraud and calling for investigation. Once again the said

messages are not substantiated and are merely messages sent on

2 of 6

P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

whatsapp. The Suit was filed on 17.10.2025. However before filing of

the Suit proceedings being concerned the Plaintiff approached the

Investigating Authorities by a detailed complaint dated 09.09.2025 to

the Suit plaint. Acting on the said complaint, Plaintiff also received

response from the said Investigating Authority and during their

meeting it was informed to them that concerned emails are emanating

from Switzerland through the website / Application - Proton AG.

7. Dr. Chandrachud would immediately draw my attention to

the fact in the case of M/s. Moser Design Associates (India) Private

Limited V/s. State of Karnataka and Ors. 1 Court has taken cognizance

of emails originating from said Proton AG Website / Application and

has passed certain directions to block the said Website / Application

Proton AG email id due to serious reasons as stated in that decision.

8. In the present case, it is seen that the emails are received by

Plaintiff from the email id : [email protected]

whereas whatsapp messages are received from unknown number

beginning with the prefix +44 7818. Prima facie, +44 7818 appears

to be originating from United Kingdom.

9. Be that as it may, Defendant No.5 which is the Indian

Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) through its Nodal Officer under

Ministry of Home Affairs shall take appropriate steps in accordance

1 Writ Petition No.2358 of 2025 (GM-RES) decided on 29.04.2025.

3 of 6

P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

with law and orders passed by this Court.

10. Plaintiff in their Suit plaint have identified Defendant No.1

to be John Doe / unknown person and operating through aforesaid

email id [email protected] whereas Defendant

No.2 is Proton AG, the email service provider incorporated in

Switzerland which operates the email id 'Proton AG' used by

Defendant No.1. Defendant Nos.3 to 5 are functionaries of the

Government.

11. After going through the aforesaid material with the able

assistance of Dr. Chandrachud, I am of prima facie opinion that the

campaign sought to be run by Defendant No.1 is on face of record

malicious, unsubstantiated and undoubtedly affects the reputation of

the Plaintiff. Plaintiff is governed by various regulatory norms of the

SEBI which according to Plaintiff they have been duly observing in all

their operations.

12. Dr. Chandrachud clarifies the position that SEBI has not

taken any action whatsoever against Plaintiff and the Plaintiff

maintains the highest standards of transparency and ethics as required

by the policy makers and the regulator in accordance with law in all its

operations, filing and dealings.

13. In view of the above, Plaintiff has made out an arguable case

for immediate grant of ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (a)

4 of 6

P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

to (d) of the Interim Application which read thus:-

"a) Pending the hearing of the present suit this Hon'ble Court be pleased to Pass interim Injunction restraining Defendant no.1(John Doe), his agents, representatives, or any person acting on his behalf, from communicating, publishing, distributing, circulating, or disseminating in any manner the defamatory, threatening, false, or malicious allegations concerning the Plaintiff and its management in any medium, including print, electronic, or social media;

b) Pending the hearing of the present suit this Hon'ble Court be pleased to Pass interim Injunction directing Defendant no.2 (Proton AG) to forthwith disclose to this Hon'ble Court in a sealed cover all subscriber information, user details, contact details, user logs, IP addresses with timestamps, registration data, and all other relevant information pertaining to the user(s) of the email ID [email protected]. This disclosure should include, but not be limited to, the contents of all emails sent from the said email address, logs of all activities associated with the account, and any other data that may assist in identifying the perpetrator(s) and evidencing the defamatory acts committed by Defendant No.1;

c) Pending the hearing of the present suit this Hon'ble Court be pleased to Pass interim Injunction against defendants and more specifically Defendant No. 2 (Proton AG) to forthwith remove, delete, block, or otherwise restrain access to any and all content, emails, or publications containing the defamatory and threatening material originating from Defendant No.1;

d) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to Pass a interim injunction directing Defendants No.3, 4, and 5 to take all necessary steps, including issuing requisite directions and notifications, to ensure compliance by Defendant No.2 with the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court for disclosure of information and removal/blocking of defamatory content. "

14. Hence, issue notice to Defendants.

15. Humdast permitted. In addition to Court's notice, Plaintiff is

directed to serve the Defendants a copy of this order and copy of Suit

and Interim Application and inform about the next date of hearing by

any permissible mode of service and file appropriate affidavit of service

with tangible proof thereof.

5 of 6

P9.SL.34088.2025+.doc

16. Defendants are directed to file their Affidavit-in-Reply before

the next date with an advance copy to Advocate for Plaintiff.

17. Liberty to apply for further orders is granted to Plaintiff on

compliance of the above order.

18. Stand over to 11th February, 2026.

H. H. SAWANT                                                  [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]


               HARSHADA by HARSHADA
                        HANUMANT
               HANUMANT SAWANT
               SAWANT   Date: 2026.01.29
                            18:35:34 +0530




                                                                                               6 of 6



 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter