LAWS(GJH)-2024-1-81

ANN SAURABH DUTT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On January 22, 2024
Ann Saurabh Dutt Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) Having heard learned advocate for the petitioner and respondent No.2 who appeared as party-in-person, it appears that the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and other matrimonial proceedings were going on between the present petitioner and respondent No.2. The proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act being Criminal Application No.543 of 2016, which was pending before the learned 2nd Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) came be concluded on 29/8/2016. [2.1] Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, present petitioner preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal No.148/2019 before the learned Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural). The proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act came to be partly allowed in favor of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that in the complaint under the D.V. Act as well as other application filed before the police authorities dtd. 6/4/2016 some defamatory statements being made against present respondent Nos.2 and 3 by the wife of the petitioner herein and in this regard some observations being made by the learned trial Judge and based on the aforesaid statements, Criminal Inquiry No.12/2021 came to be preferred by the present respondent Nos.2 and 3 under Ss. 191, 193 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the present petitioner alleging that the petitioner has made defamatory statements and other allegations are leveled against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that the learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance beyond the limitation and without applying the mind. Further, it is stated that on the date of pronouncement or declaration of any defamatory statements, cause of action would arise and not on the date of judgment or finding. Further, he has raised a contention that there is a bar under Sec. 195(1)(b) of the CrPC qua allegation of fabricating evidence but herein the learned Magistrate has not taken any cognizance or issue process under Sec. 191 and 193 of the IPC.