ARCOT N VEERASAMY Vs. J JAYALALITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been preferred against the order passed in Crl. M.P. 756/1998 in C.C. No. 2592/1998 pending on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore. Certain brief facts that are essential to appreciate the rival contentions in this revision are as below :

(2.) The respondent lodged a complaint under S. 190(1)(a) of Cr. P.C. for an offence under S. 500, IPC before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai against the petitioner, through her power of attorney Mr. V. S. Sethuraman, alleging that the petitioner made defamatory statements and the same appeared as a news item in the Newspaper. The power of attorney of the complainant while presenting the complaint also filed a petition under S. 199, Cr. P.C. requesting the Court to grant leave to make the complaint. This petition was taken on file by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Crl. M.P. No. 1293/97 and he passed the following order :

(3.) This order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was dated 17-4-1997. Thereafter, he registered the complaint in Crl. M.P. No. 1329/97, recorded the sworn statement of the power of attorney and dismissed the complaint by order dated 23-4-1997 holding that the sworn statement cannot be recorded from the power of attorney and also holding that there was no sufficient material to make out the offence complained of and no prima facie case has been made out. Aggrieved by this order, the complainant came on revision before this Court. This Court in Crl. R.C. No. 273/97 held that the complaint should not be dismissed merely on the basis of the alleged invalid sworn statement given by the power of attorney. This Court further held as follows :