KUNHIKANNAN Vs. KALLIANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant in C. C. No. 61 of 1970 on the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Tellicherry, is the petitioner before me. A complaint was filed under S. 500 IPC. alleging that the respondents in a registered notice sent through their lawyer referred to the complainant as zpa'k k'xn and also that he is a constant defaulter in paying rent. THE learned magistrate discharged the accused on the ground that no offence was made out. He found that the expression Zpa'k k'xn only indicated that he is the son of an unfortunate woman and therefore there was nothing defamatory in that statement. No finding was entered by the learned Magistrate on the second ground, namely, whether the reference in the notice that the complainant was a constant defaulter in paying rent constituted defamation.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the order of discharge, the complainant took the matter before the Sessions Judge, Tellicherry, in Criminal R. P. No. 10 of 1971. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the revision and refused to make a reference to this Court holding that the order of discharge was correct. It is against this that the present revision is filed.

(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Courts below have not approached the case in the proper perspective and that there has been a miscarriage of justice on account of non-appreciation of the ingredients of the offence of defamation and also on account of the fact that Ext. P4 was not properly construed. THE trial magistrate found that the statements in Ext. P-4 will not constitute defamation. He discussed the various meanings given to the word Zpa'k in several dictionaries which were brought to his notice. I am giving below the various meanings given to the word Zpa'k in the dictionaries brought to my notice.