LI Network
Published on: 21 July, 2025 23:23 IST
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has directed IT giant Wipro Limited to pay ₹2 lakh in damages to its former Principal consultant, Abhijit Mishra, after concluding that his termination letter contained defamatory content that could tarnish his professional reputation.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, came in response to a defamation suit filed by Mr. Mishra, who had sought ₹2.1 crore in compensation along with a revised termination letter free of stigmatic remarks. In its 51-page order, the Court held that the language used in the letter- particularly the characterization of Mishra’s conduct as “malicious”—was both unfounded and damaging.
“This Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned termination letter, replete with stigmatic language and bereft of any foundation, constitutes actionable defamation,” the judgment stated.
The bench underscored the lack of evidence supporting the company’s claims and emphasized the detrimental impact such accusations could have on Mishra’s future employability and professional dignity. “The remarks therein, couched in the use of the term ‘malicious conduct,’ not only lack substantiation but also have a direct and deleterious impact on the future employability and professional dignity of the plaintiff,” the Court observed.
Abhijit Mishra, who served as a Principal Consultant at Wipro, was terminated via a letter dated June 5, 2020, which stated that his alleged “malicious conduct” had led to an “irreparable breakdown” in the employment relationship. Challenging the contents of the letter, Mishra argued that the claims were baseless and had severely harmed his reputation.
In its defence, Wipro contended that Mishra had failed to meet the expectations of his senior role, focusing instead on building a public image as a “Crusader for Social Change.” The company alleged he was engaged in activities unrelated to his official responsibilities. However, the Court noted that Wipro did not provide any credible evidence to back these claims.
“In the absence of a plea of truth or any attempt to substantiate the impugned remarks, the allegations remain entirely uncorroborated,” the Court said. “To allow such unsubstantiated imputations to subsist would result in a continuing injustice, undermining the professional integrity of the plaintiff.”
Addressing Wipro’s argument that the letter was not published to any third party, the Court invoked the doctrine of compelled self-publication, stating that Mishra would be forced to present the letter to prospective employers. Given this foreseeable consequence, the defamatory remarks could not be shielded under the excuse of private communication.
“The defendant, being an employer itself, was, in all probability, aware that prospective employers would inquire about the plaintiff’s background. Such disclosure, being a foreseeable and natural consequence, renders the act actionable in law,” the Court observed.
In final order, High Court ruled in Mishra’s favour, awarding him ₹2 lakh in damages and holding Wipro accountable for the defamatory contents of the termination letter.