VISHWA NATH Vs. SHAMBHU NATH PANDEYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482, Cr PC with a prayer to quash the complaint (Annexure No. I) filed by one Shambhu Nath Pandeya against the present petitioner and one Shrish Chandra under Section 500, IPC and to stay further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 58/IX, of 1981, under Section 500, IPC, pending in the Court of the IInd Addl. Munsif Magistrate, Mathura.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present proceeding are that the applicant is the editor, printer and publisher of a string of multilingual magazines. 'Bhu-Bharti' is one of such magazines which is published fortnightly in Hindi. The applicant published in the second number of November, 1980 in Bhu-Bharti an article written by Shrish Chand Mishra, who is the co-accused in the aforesaid complaint. This article is titled

(3.) In para 8 of the complaint (Annexure-I) this portion of the article has been set out, which is alleged to be defamatory to the whole community of Ahiwasi Brahmins. It is alleged that the same has been written to lower down the dignity and reputation of Ahiwasi Brahmins. The complainant Shambhu Nath Pandeya was one of the members of Ahiwasi Brahmin community. Aggrieved by the aforesaid publication of the aforementioned portion of the article in Bhu-Bharti, second number of November, 1980 the complainant filed the said complaint against the petitioner as well as Shrish Chand alleging the same as defamatory statement against Ahiwasi Brahmins. The learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the case recorded the statement of complainant Shambhu Nath Pandeya under Section 200, Cr PC and of Kanhaiya Lal Pandey under Section 202, Cr PC. and he being of the opinion that there was sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner-applicant and Shrish Chand Misra under Section 500, IPC issued process against them for appearing in his court on 26-3-1981, (vide copy of the order dated 13-2-81). The applicant-petitioner appeared personally in the court on 66-81 and thereafter his personal attendance was exempted. Thereafter complainant Shambhu Nath Pandeya died. Sri M. P. Pandey, Advocate, who was appearing as a counsel for the said Shambhu Nath Pandeya, moved an application under Section 256, Cr PC before the learned Magistrate concerned stating that the complainant Shambhu Nath Pandeya has died and the personal attendance of the complainant be dispensed with and the case may be proceeded wied with (Copy of the application, Annexure-III). In the said application, it has also been stated that the case relates to serious offence containing highly defamatory allegations against the Ahiwasi Brahmin community as a whole to which the complainant and the major portion of the witnesses of the list belong.