J TANIGUCHI Vs. K GOPI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 3466 of 2000 on the file of XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and he seeks to quash the records of the case.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the complaint has been filed against him for the alleged offence under Ss. 500 and 504 of I.P.C. and the same is pending in C.C. No. 3466 of 2000. The allegations in the complaint are that there were disputes between the staff of Mitsui and Co. Ltd., Madras Office, with the management about promotion, increment and other benefits of the staff and no proper settlement was reached in the talks held at Chennai Office on 7-3-2000 between Dr. Veeramani, President of Bharatiya Kamagar Sena, Madras Unit and Mr. Parameswaran, representing the workers and the petitioner, representing the Management of the Company and in that meeting, the petitioner has allegedly called the workers "beggars" and representatives of the workers allegedly got very angry and agitated and went out of the room. The other staff workers also got very angry and agitated and they grabbed sticks and other objects and tried to attack the management people. The complainant and other representatives of the Union pacified the staff workers. The petitioner allegedly insulted the workers by calling "beggars" and committed defamation knowing fully the implications and thus instigated them to commit breach of peace and hence he is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Ss. 500 and 504 of I.P.C. The petitioner has further averred that the allegations that, in the meeting held at the Chennai office of the company on 7-3-2000, he called the workers "beggars" is totally false, baseless and malicious. During the discussion, when the representatives of the workers said "the staff are not beggars," the petitioner, as a joke said "they are bigger." But, unfortunately, the representatives of the workers suddenly started to say loudly "don't say as beggars" and never listened to further talks. Because of the lack of fluency in English and because of Japanese pronouncement of English, when the petitioner used the word 'bigger,' the representatives of the staff workers mistook it as 'beggar' and this is a clear case of misunderstanding. The petitioner had no reason or intention to use the word 'beggars' about the staff of the company. The petitioner did not make any defamatory statement as alleged and he never insulted the workers. The petitioner always treated the employees as family members with great respect. The respondent/complainant has grudge against the petitioner for warning him from sending representation directly to Mr. Kazmi Nakagawa, who is in Japan, in violation of the hierarchy. The respondent/complainant did not attend the meeting on 7-3-2000 and he has no personal knowledge of the incident. He has not signed the complaint in any representative capacity. No incident occurred as alleged in the complaint and neither Mr. Parameswaran has recorded any audio cassette of the proceedings of the meeting held on 7-3-2000 in the company. They are only figments of imagination and purposely made to harass the petitioner. The respondent has failed to establish a prima facie case against the petitioner and no offence as alleged has been made out against him. In order to attract S. 499, Explanation 2, the identity of the association or the collection of persons must be established so as to be relatable to the defamatory words or imputations. No offence as alleged against the petitioner has been made out against him and there is no case worth going for trial. The proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed.

(3.) It is alleged in the complaint that in the talks held at Chennai Office of Mitsui and Co. Ltd. on 7-3-2000 between Dr. Veeramani, President of Bharatiya Kamagar Sena, Madras Unit and Mr. Parameswaran, representing the workers and the petitioner herein, representing the management of the company, regarding promotion, increment and other benefits of the staff, Mr. Parameswaran said that the workers are not beggars to get Rs. 5/- as annual increment and the petitioner herein replied as "yes they are beggars" and the remarks had brought disrepute to the workers and they feel insulted and defamed in the eyes of others.