KAZI JALIL ABBASI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH his order dated 25-7-74, passed in Criminal Revision No. 110 of 1973, the 1st Addl. District Judge, Faizabad has made this reference with the recommendation that the order dated 23-8- 73 passed by Sri A. U. Khan, Magistrate 1st class, Faizabad in complaint Case No. 387 of 1971, Mohammad Hashim Ansari v. Kazi Jalil Abbasi, summoning the revisionist to stand his trial under Section 500 IPC be quashed.

(2.) THE facts of the case, giving rise to this reference, are that on 22-10- 1971 Mohd. Hashim Ansari, opposite party filed a complaint before the ADM (J), Faizabad against Kazi Jalil Abbasi revisionist and six others alleging that an offence under Section 500 was committed by them. It was mentioned in the complaint that on 2-1-71 a public meeting was held in the city of Gorakhpur under the auspices of All India Bangla Desh National Integration Convention That meeting was addressed by the revisionist and several others. THE revisionist was then a Minister of State in the U. P. Government. During his speech he had allegedly remarked that the Indian Muslims were traitors and that they used to look at Indian problems through Pakistani spectacles. That speech was published in an Urdu weekly of Varanasi named Tanveer. THE complainant, who was a resident of Ajodhya in the district of Faizabed, read with that news item on 18-10-71 and considered it to be defamatory for himself and other Muslims. He then filed a complaint before the ADM (J) against the revisionist and six others. Evidence under Section 200 and Section 202 CrPC was recorded by the learned ADM (J) and then the case was transferred to the tile of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Akbarpur at Faizabad who passed the impugned order. Through that order he summoned only the revisionist to stand his trial under Section 500 IPC and discharged others named in the complaint. THE revisionist then filed Griminal Revision No 110 of 1973 before the District & Sessions Judge, Faizabad. It was heard by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Faizabad who has made this reference. In his view the impugned speech was made by the revisionist while discharging his duty as a public servant and, therefore, cognizance of the alleged offence could not be taken without local Governments' sanction under Section 197 (1) CrPC. It has also been held by the learned Ist Addl. District & Sessions Judge that the Magisterial Court at Faizabad could not take cognizance of the complaint because the alleged defamatory utterances were made at Gorakhpur. Lastly he held that the learned ADM (J) was legally not justified in transferring the case to the file of any other Magistrate after recording evidence under Section 200 and Section 202 CrPC. THE Magistrate concerned has submitted a lengthy explanation dated 25-7-74 justifying the impugned order passed by him.

(3.) IT has been held in Matajog Dubey v. H. C. Bhari, AIR 1958 SC 44 that: