LAWS(MAD)-2012-6-281

N R SANKARA NARAYANAN Vs. R MANOHARAN

Decided On June 29, 2012
N R Sankara Narayanan Appellant
V/S
R Manoharan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal dated 28.10.2003, made in C.C.No.24 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate's Court No.VII, Coimbatore.

(2.) THE appellant herein as a complainant filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. stating that when the appellant herein as a Trustee of the Karuppanna Nadar Trust, filed a Trust O.P.No.233 of 1995 before the First Additional District Court, Coimbatore, seeking permission for alienating the trust property and the respondent/accused herein had filed an application in I.A.No.218 of 1998 to implead himself as a party in that proceedings and he had specifically mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of that application, the appellant/complainant is an habitual offender and he sold the property worth more than a crore without obtaining permission from the Court. Therefore, the appellant herein issued a notice to the respondent/accused on 30.12.1998 sought for a written unconditional apology, since the respondent/accused made a defamatory statement against the complainant. On receiving the same, the respondent/accused sent a reply on 4.1.1999 stating that there is no necessity for asking apology. Since the respondent herein intended to be make imputation concerning the appellant to harm, or knowing to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of the appellant and the respondent defamed the appellant/complainant, he filed a private complaint against the respondent under Section 500 IPC.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant/complainant would submit that the respondent herein is none other than the brother's son of the appellant and he is an Advocate and he is fully aware of the consequences of his defamatory statement made in the affidavit filed in support of the application in I.A.No.218 of 1998. But the trial Court has not considered this aspect and acquitted the respondent and hence, he prayed for setting aside the order of acquittal and allowing of this appeal.