M N MEERA Vs. A C MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is a retired Taluk Supply Officer hailing from Taliparamba. He is aggrieved that through the impugned order passed in C.M.P. No. 7688 of 1997 the complaint filed by him against the first respondent in this case alleging offence under Sec. 500 of the I.P.C. was dismissed under Sec. 203 of the Cr. P.C., inspite of the fact that he had examined three witnesses to prima facie establish the correctness of his averments.

(2.) IN the complaint the petitioner alleged that the accused, who is working as R.D.O., Thalassery, while participating in the meeting of the Food Advisory Committee held in the Collectorate Hall, Cannanore on 20.7.1996, made certain imputations aimed at the petitioner. The accused allegedly referred to certain irregularities in the performance of the Universal Gas Agency. The complainant alleged that after making a statement that a complaint directly filed against the irregularities in the Gas Agency did not yield any result and that the circumstances prevailing are such that the delinquent would escape and the complainant would suffer and that actually after getting huge amounts the gas Cylinders were being illegally distributed, the accused made the following further statement : "A retired supply officer of Taliparamba is the person behind this irregularity."

(3.) THE court, after considering the said statements gave two reasons for dismissing the complaint. THE first was that the words complained of did not refer to any particular individual; that it could equally apply to others belonging to the same class in so far as the accused did not mention the name of the present complainant at any point of time. Secondly, it was mentioned that the accused had filed a case of defamation against Sudinam Daily and as such it was unlikely that the accused would have divulged the defamatory statements alleged in the present case to CW3, the two being not on friendly terms in view of the pending criminal case.