STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. BHUPEN DUTTA BHOWMIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For certain editorials published and printed in 'dainik Sambad' dated 15.12.1990, 16.12.1990 and 20. 12.1990, a complaint was filed by appellant No. 2, alleging that the three editorials contained a series of highly false and defamatory statements concerning the integrity, conduct and character of appellant No. 2 and that two editorials dated 15.12.1990 and 20. 12.1990 contained a series of statements which were aimed at abetting, provoking, instigating and/or exhorting public or the people of the State generally to commit the murder of appellant N6.2 and other responsible officers of the Government and to dispose of the dead bodies of appellant No. 2 and other responsible/officers after murdering them in a most inhuman manner. The complaint filed by appellant No. 2 was for offences under Sections 500/501/502, Indian Penal Code and Sections 115 and 117, Indian Penal Code. The expression used in the editorials have been referred to in paragraph 12 of the complaint and it is asserted that the action of the Editor and the Publisher is punishable under Sections 115 and 117, Indian Penal Code. The learned chief Judicial Magistrate, after perusing the record, committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Vide order dated 6.8.1991, the learned additional Sessions Judge found that there was a prim a facie case on the basis of the averments in the complaint and the preliminary evidence recorded in the complaint for framing charges against respondent No. l for offences under Sections 500/501/502 and 115/117, 1pc and framed the charges accordingly. Charges were also framed against respondent no. 2 for offences under Sections 500/501/ 115/117, Indian Penal Code. The respondents filed a criminal revision before the Guwahati High Court. A learned Single Judge of the High Court vide judgment and order dated 8.6.1992 held that prima facie case under Sections 500/501/ 502, 1pc was made out. The learned Single judge, therefore, did not interfere with the framing of the charges for the said offences. However, so far as charges under Sections 115/117, Indian Penal Code are concerned, the learned Single judge opined that those charges could not have been framed and quashed the same. It was observed:

(2.) This appeal by special leave calls in question the order of the High Court quashing charges against the respondents for offences under Sections 115/117,indian Penal Code.

(3.) We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.