K.P. Sasikala vs Rajmohan Unnithan: Court Acquits Congress MP in 2017 Defamation Case
A Cherthala court acquits Congress leader Rajmohan Unnithan in a criminal defamation case filed by K.P. Sasikala
A local court in Cherthala, Kerala, has acquitted Congress leader and Kasaragod MP Rajmohan Unnithan in a criminal defamation case filed by K.P. Sasikala, widely known as “Sasikala Teacher,” who alleged that he had made derogatory remarks against her during a televised debate on Manorama News in 2017.
On September 15, 2025, Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Sherin K George, held that the prosecution had failed to produce primary evidence of the alleged defamatory broadcast, and Unnithan was entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Sasikala, a teacher by profession and then Kerala State president of the Hindu Aikya Vedi, had moved the court claiming that Unnithan defamed her during Manorama News’s programme 'Counter Point' on October 2, 2017. She alleged that during the debate, he called her a “poisonous creature” and falsely linked her speech to the death of a child in Kasaragod. She further claimed that the anchor endorsed the remarks and the channel broadcast them widely, causing her reputational damage and mental distress.
While Sasikala’s complaint named three respondents, Unnithan (as A1), the anchor of the programme (A2), and Manorama News (A3), court had taken cognizance only against Unnithan. He was summoned, enlarged on bail, and stood trial for offences under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, which deal with defamation and its punishment.
During trial, Sasikala deposed as PW1 and produced four supporting witnesses. Among them, a journalist with Janmabhumi said he had watched the programme and was shocked at the remarks, while two other witnesses described the statements as offensive and damaging to her reputation. However, the prosecution relied only on legal notices and did not produce a certified video recording, transcript, or broadcast log of the debate.
The anchor of the show, examined as PW5, acknowledged hosting the programme but told the court he could not recall the specific remarks attributed to Unnithan. The magistrate found this omission crucial, noting that as a material witness, the anchor was in a position to corroborate or refute the allegations.
Pointing to these gaps, court observed that in cases of alleged defamation through mass media, the broadcast itself is primary evidence. The failure to summon or produce the recording, or to call custodial staff from the channel, was described as a “fatal omission". The magistrate also noted that several of the witnesses were professional associates or ideological sympathisers of the complainant, weakening the independence of their testimony.
“The mere oral assertion of defamatory utterance, unsupported by broadcast records or neutral testimony, cannot suffice to attract criminal liability under Section 500 IPC,” the court said, citing Supreme Court judgments including Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, (2016) and S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal, (2010), which emphasise that criminal defamation must be proved with clear evidence of publication and harm to reputation.
Finding that the complainant had failed to establish the essential ingredients of Section 499 IPC, court acquitted Unnithan under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. His bail bond was cancelled and he was set at liberty. Since no cognizance had been taken against the anchor or the channel, the proceedings against them did not continue.
Case Title: KP Sasikala v Rajmohan Unnithan
Order Date: September 15, 2025
Judge: Judicial Magistrate First Class-I Sherin K George