THIRUMURTHI AND ANOTHER Vs. MUTHUSAMY GOUNDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are accused in C.C. No. 335 of 1970 on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Erode. The respondent herein is their father. The complaint is for as offence under S. 499, I.P.C. . There was a publication in 'Dhina Malar' dated 27th July, 1970 to the effect that the respondent is of unsound mind and is wandering in the streets. One Subramania Iyer of Veerappan Chatram to Erode limits informed the respondent a bout this publication. Thereupon, the respondent issued a notice to the petitioners, and in their reply, the petitioners repudiated the allegations. The complaint was then filed by the respondent to the Court. The petitioners objected to the trial, stating that the publication, if at all, was only in Tiruchirapalli, where the letter was opened, and as such the Sub -Divisional Magistrate at Erode has no jurisdiction to try the case. The learned Sub Divisional Magistrate has held that he has jurisdiction to proceed with the trial because the defamatory letter was prepared and posted at Erode. This is now challenged in this revision.

(2.) THE publication in this case was in 'Dhina Malar'. The complainant's case is that he was informed of this defamatory matter by one Subramania Iyer, who resides with in Erode limits. To maintain a prosecution for defamation in a particular Court there must be publication of the libel within the limits of the jurisdiction of that Court. Being a publication of a newspaper containing the libel it is sufficient to prove that the paper was delivered within the territorial jurisdiction of the court and it need not be proved that the libellous matter was seen or read by any particular person as in the case of a letter. Newspaper is a commodity printed for the purpose of being read and it can be presumed that it was so read. Vide Chellappan Pillai v. Karanjia, (1962) 2 Cri. L.j. 142. The essence of the offence of defamation consists in the publication of the libellous matter. The publication in this case is in a newspaper which is circulated in all places. thus, there was publication at Erode within the limits of the jurisdiction of the Sub Divisional Magistrate's Court, Erode. The order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate is correct. The revision is dismissed.