S VARADAN Vs. V ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the complaint in C.C.No.351 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Karur and have taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 500, 501 and 502 I.P.C as against the petitioner and Others, in which, the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.2.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the respondent herein is running a Textile business in Karur. In the business run by the respondent, more than 50 labourers are working. Apart from running the Textile business, he is doing public service among the general public and thereby, he is having good reputation among the public living in the Karur District. In the year 2011, the brother of the respondent viz., Senthil Balaji, contested in the assembly election and after winning in the election, he has become the Minister of the State. In the same year, the local body elections were held in Karur District and due to the sincere work of the respondent and his brother, the ruling AIADMK Party captured so many seats. Previous to the said election, the first accused Maniraj was elected as a Councilor in Karur Municipality. But, in the election held in 2011, he was defeated by a candidate contested on behalf of the AIADMK Party, when the first accused Maniraj was facing the election on behalf of the DMK Party. Since the first accused lost the post of Municipal Councilor, he is having grudge against the respondent. In the meanwhile, on 19.09.2013, one Kamatchi Periyasamy @ Gokul lodged a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Karur District, in which, he made an allegation of land grabbing. Based on the complaint, a case has been registered in Crime No.31 of 2011 against 8 accused persons. It is further alleged that the petitioner had entered appearance for the Accused Nos.2,6 and 8 in the above case and in order to obtain a personal gain, the petitioner entered into an agreement with Kamatchi Periyasamy @Gogul and arranged to give a confessional statement in Crime No.31 of 2011 with an intention to take vengeance against the respondent and the petitioner had stated that Kamatchi Periyasamy @Gogul had given a confession statement in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur in which he had stated that he was compelled to take liquor and obtained signatures in the white paper and thereby grabbed his land and administered toxic injection and he was detained for two weeks and he was tortured and it wad done by the respondent. The above statement appeared and published by the other accused personsal in Kalaigner TV and in Kalai Kadir, Tamil Daily and thus the respondent was defamed and the petitioner and other accused have committed the offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 I.P.C.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.2. The offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 I.P.C are not at all attracted as against the petitioner. The main ingredients require for constituting an offence punishable under Section 500 I.P.C are one making or published any imputation concerning any person, such imputations must have been made by words either spoken or intended to be read or by signs or by visible representations. The said imputation must have been made with an intention to harm or with knowledge or having reason to believe that the same will harm the reputation of the person concerned. It is seen from the allegations as against the petitioner is that publishing the news in the newspaper is not amounting involving in an act of defamation. The published news item in question in facts and circumstances could not be said to have been published with an intention of harming the reputation of the complainant, offending news item could only be said to have been published in good faith and public interest. Therefore, he prays to quash the private complaint.