THIMMAPPA BHAT Vs. M P APPACHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these petitions, petitioners namely accused Nos.1 to 4 have prayed for quashing the order dated 23.02.2013 and 14.06.2016 passed by learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Madikeri in PCR No.53/2013 (CC.No.542/2016 renumbered as Spl.C.C.No.151/2018) now pending on the file of the LXXXI Additional City Civil And Sessions Judge CCH-82, Bangalore.

(2.) Based on the private complaint lodged by the respondent, learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Madikeri by its order dated 23.02.2013 took cognizance of the offences punishable under sections 499 and 500 of IPC and on recording the sworn statement of the complainant, issued summons to accused Nos.1 to 4 by order dated 14.06.2016.

(3.) These orders are challenged by the petitioners on the ground that the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned orders erroneously and mechanically without application of mind. The facts alleged in the FIR and sworn statement do not prima facie make out the ingredients of the offences punishable under sections 499 and 500 of IPC. Accused No.4 has contended that the relevant portion of the alleged paper publication shows that he merely expressed his opinion in good faith and therefore, the same does not lead to the prosecution of the petitioner for any criminal offence. Petitioners in Criminal Petition No.2943/2017 have contended that what has been published in the newspaper is the statement made by accused No.4 demanding Lokayuktha and CBI probe against the complainant, as such, the said publication does not amount to defamation. It is further contended that the complainant has not examined any independent witnesses to show that his good name or reputation has been lowered in the eyes of the general public on account of the alleged publication. Thus, petitioners have sought for quashing of the impugned proceedings as well the order of taking cognizance and issuance of summons to the petitioners / accused Nos.1 to 4.