Disha Salian’s father files ₹2,000 crore defamation suit, Special Civil Suit No. 469/2026, before Thane Court; ₹3 lakh court fee paid through public participation, with citizens contributing a symbolic ₹1 each!
99% of the compensation recovered to be distributed among victimised women and other citizens!
“This is not merely Satish Salian’s fight; it is the people’s fight for justice!” — Advocate Tanveer Nizam; historic legal battle supported by ordinary citizens through symbolic contributions!
Preliminary hearing scheduled before Judge Pansare on October 21; injunction, ₹2,000 crore bank guarantee, attachment of properties and civil imprisonment in the event of failure to furnish security sought against Uddhav Thackeray, Aaditya Thackeray, Sanjay Raut, Anil Deshmukh, Aseem Sarode, Akhil Chitre, Sushma Andhare and Nikhil Wagle!
Despite High Court orders and documentary evidence, defendants accused of publishing false and defamatory material, spreading one-sided news reports and portraying Satish Salian’s pursuit of justice as “politically motivated”!
Thane, October 19, 2026: A significant preliminary hearing in the ₹2,000 crore defamation suit filed by Satish Salian, father of the late Disha Salian, against Aaditya Thackeray, Uddhav Thackeray, Sanjay Raut, Sushma Andhare, Nikhil Wagle and others is scheduled for October 21, 2026, before the Civil Court at Thane.
The case has also attracted attention because of the public participation involved in financing the court fee.
Special Civil Suit No. 469/2026 has been instituted before the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane. Satish Salian has deposited the required court fee of ₹3 lakh in accordance with the applicable court rules.
Significantly, according to his advocate, Adv. Tanveer Nizam, the amount was raised through public participation, with citizens contributing a symbolic ₹1 each.
“This is not merely the personal battle of Satish Salian. It is a battle of the people who have come forward in support of justice,” Adv. Nizam stated.
The matter has been listed for preliminary hearing before Judge Pansare on October 21, 2026.
₹3 Lakh Court Fee Raised Through Symbolic ₹1 Contributions: “This Is the People’s Fight for Justice,” Says Adv. Tanveer Nizam
One of the most remarkable aspects of the case is the reported collection of ₹3 lakh towards the court fee for the ₹2,000 crore defamation suit through contributions from ordinary citizens.
According to Adv. Tanveer Nizam, counsel for Satish Salian, citizens were invited to participate in the legal struggle by contributing a symbolic amount of ₹1 each.
Adv. Nizam clarified that the contribution of ₹1 was purely symbolic, intended to ensure public participation in the pursuit of justice. Even citizens who voluntarily offered larger amounts were politely declined, and contributions exceeding ₹1 per person were not accepted.
Explaining the initiative, Adv. Nizam stated:
“This is not merely Satish Salian’s personal battle; it is the people’s battle. The symbolic contribution of one rupee was introduced to enable ordinary citizens to participate in this struggle for justice. This is not a fundraising exercise but an effort to build public solidarity and collective participation in the pursuit of justice.”
According to him, the legal battle supported by citizens through their individual contributions represents public confidence in the justice delivery system and their determination to stand united against injustice.
It has also been announced on behalf of Satish Salian that 99% of the compensation actually recovered through the lawsuit will be distributed among victimised women and other aggrieved citizens.
October 21 Hearing Before Judge Pansare: All Eyes on the ₹2,000 Crore Suit Supported by Public Participation
In Special Civil Suit No. 469/2026, Satish Salian has sought damages amounting to ₹2,000 crore.
Adv. Tanveer Nizam stated that the required court fee of ₹3 lakh has been deposited using funds collected through symbolic contributions of ₹1 from participating citizens.
He further clarified:
“One rupee is merely a symbolic contribution. Any amount offered beyond that has been respectfully declined because this struggle is not about collecting money. It is about justice and the participation of the people.”
The preliminary hearing scheduled before Judge Pansare on October 21 has consequently drawn considerable attention.
Defamation Campaign Despite High Court Orders and Evidence: Serious Allegations by Satish Salian
According to the plaint filed by Satish Salian, he possesses substantial documentary and other evidence concerning the circumstances surrounding the death of his daughter, Disha Salian.
The plaint contends that despite the existence of relevant High Court orders and supporting evidence, certain political leaders and other individuals deliberately attempted to damage his reputation.
It is alleged that false and defamatory material was published, one-sided news reports were circulated, and a sustained narrative was promoted portraying his legal pursuit of justice as “politically motivated.”
The plaint further alleges that the objective of this campaign was to undermine Satish Salian’s credibility, create misconceptions about him among the public and give a political colour to his judicial proceedings.
On these grounds, Satish Salian has instituted the ₹2,000 crore civil defamation suit against the concerned defendants.
99% of Compensation to Be Distributed Among Victimised Women and Other Citizens
Satish Salian’s legal team has clarified that 99% of the compensation recovered pursuant to the lawsuit will be distributed among victimised women and other aggrieved citizens.
According to his representatives, the objective of the proceedings is therefore not limited to obtaining personal damages but also extends to providing financial assistance to victims who are struggling to secure justice.
The amount of compensation, if any, ultimately awarded and recovered will depend upon the court’s adjudication and subsequent enforcement proceedings.
₹2,000 Crore Bank Guarantee, Attachment of Properties and Civil Imprisonment Sought
Satish Salian has sought stringent interim reliefs against the defendants.
The reliefs requested include removal of allegedly defamatory news reports, videos, interviews and social media publications; restraint against their further publication or circulation; preservation of electronic evidence; and directions requiring the defendants to furnish a bank guarantee of ₹2,000 crore or appropriate security, including attachment of properties, to safeguard the potential recovery of damages.
The applications also seek appropriate orders for civil imprisonment in the event of failure to furnish the required security, subject to the applicable legal provisions.
However, civil imprisonment does not automatically follow merely because a defendant fails to provide a bank guarantee. Such an order requires compliance with the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, including the applicable requirements under Order XXXVIII, and a specific judicial determination.
The court has yet to adjudicate these interim requests.
What Happens if the Defendants Do Not Appear on October 21?
Under the Code of Civil Procedure, once a civil suit is instituted and the court directs issuance of summons, the defendants are required to be served in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
Similarly, in respect of the application for temporary injunction, commonly referred to as Exhibit-5, the court may direct issuance of notice calling upon the defendants to explain why the interim injunction sought against them should not be granted.
The defendants or their duly authorised advocates may appear before the court and accept service of summons and notices, where legally permissible.
In such circumstances, the necessity of sending a court officer to their residences for formal service may be avoided.
However, where summons have not been accepted or served, and the court directs formal service, a court officer (bailiff) may visit the defendants’ residences or other legally recognised addresses to serve the summons and notices.
Will a Court Bailiff Visit ‘Matoshree’? Could Summons Also Be Served at the Residences of Sanjay Raut, Sushma Andhare and Nikhil Wagle?
If the court directs service of summons through a bailiff, the court officer may visit the relevant service addresses of Aaditya Thackeray and Uddhav Thackeray, potentially including ‘Matoshree’, if it is the address specified for service.
Similarly, summons may be served at the residences or other legally recognised service addresses of Sanjay Raut, Sushma Andhare, Nikhil Wagle and the remaining defendants.
In many civil proceedings, defendants arrange for their advocates to appear before the court and formally accept summons and notices, thereby avoiding the necessity of service by a bailiff at their residences.
The question now is whether Aaditya Thackeray, Uddhav Thackeray and the other defendants will arrange for their advocates to accept service before the court on October 21, or whether formal service through court officers will become necessary.
Will the defendants accept the summons in court, or will a court bailiff have to visit their doorsteps?
Legal Team Led by Adv. Tanveer Nizam and Other Advocates to Argue for Satish Salian
In this widely discussed civil suit, Adv. Tanveer Nizam, Adv. Ishwarlal Agarwal, Adv. Anushka Sonawane, Adv. Payal Padwal and other advocates will represent Satish Salian and advance submissions before the court.
The legal team is expected to address the ₹2,000 crore defamation claim and the interim reliefs sought, including injunctions against defamatory publications, furnishing of a bank guarantee, attachment of properties and other protective directions.
The advocates will place their submissions before the court in support of the reliefs sought by Satish Salian.
What Will Happen Before Judge Pansare on October 21? Will a Bailiff Reach ‘Matoshree’ or Will the Thackerays Accept Summons in Court?
In Special Civil Suit No. 469/2026, Satish Salian has sought compensation of ₹2,000 crore, with the required court fee of ₹3 lakh reportedly deposited through funds collected from participating citizens.
The plaint alleges that despite the existence of High Court orders and supporting evidence, defamatory publications, one-sided reporting and politically motivated narratives were circulated to discredit Satish Salian and his pursuit of justice.
“This is not Satish Salian’s fight alone. It is the people’s fight for justice,” Adv. Tanveer Nizam reiterated.
All eyes are now on the preliminary hearing scheduled before Judge Pansare on October 21, when the court may consider the next procedural steps, including the issuance and service of summons and notices and directions concerning the pending interim applications.
Will Aaditya Thackeray and the other defendants accept summons before the court, or will a court officer (bailiff) have to visit ‘Matoshree’ and their respective residences?
The hearing on October 21 is expected to provide greater clarity on the next stage of these proceedings.
