JOSEPH VAZHACKAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein faces prosecution in C.C.No.648 of 2017 in C.M.P.No.4132 of 2017 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Haripad for offence punishable under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The crux of the allegation of the defacto complainant was that, petitioner herein, while participating in a panel discussion in a television channel programme made certain defamatory and derogatory comments touching on the reputation and integrity of the defacto complainant and another. Alleging that it was calculated and intended to downgrade the reputation of the defacto complainant and to lower his dignity before the public, complaint was laid. After examination of the complainant, Court took cognizance and issued summons to the accused. This is under challenge in the present proceeding. Notice was served on the second respondent/defacto complainant, who has not chosen to appear and to contest the proceedings.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner essentially advanced two arguments. Firstly, it was contended that, none of the ingredients of section 500 IPC were made out. Secondly, it was contended that, cognizance was taken without compliance with the mandatory enquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C, specifically having regard to the fact that the petitioner was residing at Pala beyond the jurisdiction of the Court which took cognizance. Vehemently opposing the above contentions and defending the prosecution, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the learned Magistrate has taken into consideration the seriousness of the offence and after examination of the complainant and perusing the complaint has correctly taken cognizance. That discretion shall not be interfered in exercise of section 482 Cr.P.C. It was also contended that, ingredients of section 500 IPC were made out in the above complaint which were reiterated by the complainant in his sworn statement.