JAGESHWAR PRASAD MISRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed assailing the validity of the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1182/ix of 2008 (Dr. Ram Kishore Shukla Vs. Jageshwar Prasad and others) under Section 500 IPC, P.S. Karwi, District Chitrakoot and seeks quashing of summoning order dated 28.6.2008 and also the order dated 24.1.2009 whereby prayer to discharge the accused under Section 245 (2) Cr.P.C. was refused.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State. Records have also been perused.

(3.) It appears that a complaint alleging defamation under Section 500 IPC was brought by opposite party No.2 against certain persons including applicant No.1 and 2 also. Applicant No.1, namely, Jageshwar Prasad Misra is said to be the brother-in-law of the opposite party no.2 and applicant No.2, namely, Krishna Dutt Pandey is said to be the manager of the college. Perusal of the complaint reveals that complainant has made serveral allegations against the applicant No.1 which included the allegation that as applicant no.1 was attached in the same institution and the complainant was a lecturer in the college, he used to give his signature on the blank letter pad to him so that the same may be used in the interest of the institution. But Applicant-accused kept the same papers with him and then at some stage making ill use of same papers he got a forged receipt fabricated indicating that some goold coins as well as Rs. 1,50,000/- were given by the applicant to complainant. Other allegations in the complaint indicate the circumstances as to why and how the two relatives fell apart and their relations got estranged with each other. It was also alleged that by using certain papers and the complainants signature he also got the institution registered and renewed from the office of the Assistant Registrars Firms, Societies and Chits. It was also alleged that applicant no.2 also in the capacity of the alleged manager conveyed to the office of the assistant registrar certain facts which were false. Further allegation is that a news with regard to the aforesaid borrowing of money and gold coins was also published in a newspaper and a news to the same effect was also disclosed in a news-channel while the applicant No.1 gave an interview to the same.? The grievance of the complainant is that the aforesaid publication has brought down his prestige in the estimate of his friends and people and has defamed him in eyes of society.?