PAWAN KUMAR KOHLI Vs. SUESH KUMAR KOHLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 22.3.2004 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge which had set aside the order passed by the learned M.M. dated 31.7.2003. Learned M.M. on the complaint filed by the appellant (Pawan Kumar Kohli) under Section 499 of the IPC had convicted the respondent (Sudesh Kumar Kohli) and had held him guilty under Section 500 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo SI for a period of 6 months. The impugned Crl.A. No.142/2006 Page 1 of 9 judgment had reversed the order of the Magistrate and had acquitted the respondent. This judgment is the subject matter of the present appeal.

(2.) RECORD reveals that on 20.7.2003 a complaint had been filed by the respondent before the SHO of local police station West Patel Nagar wherein the gist of the complaint was that because of a dispute between the two cousins i.e. the appellant and the respondent relating to a property, the respondent was aggrieved by the acts of the appellant. The appellant (present in person) had pointed out the defamatory lines in the aforenoted complaint. They read as under:

(3.) NEEDLESS to state that these arguments have been refuted by the learned counsel for the respondent. It is pointed out that the impugned judgment does not call for any interference as there was no intent on the part of the respondent to defame the appellant. It is pointed out that this intent has to be gathered from various circumstances and these have rightly been noted by the trial judge not to have been established; submission being that there was a gamut of inter se litigations pending between the two cousin brothers relating to their properties and it was in Crl.A. No.142/2006 Page 3 of 9 this background that the respondent bonafidely for the safety of his life and his family had made this complaint in the local police station which was only a private complaint; admittedly there was no public circulation of this document. Reliance has been placed upon AIR 1966 Orissa 15 (V 53 C 6) Dhruba Charan Khandal Vs. Dinabandu to support a submission that in this background there could be no defamation. Submission being that on count does the impugned judgment call for any interference.