DEEPAK MALLAJI ATRAM Vs. SHEIKH FARID SHEIKH SULEMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment dated 23.11.2009 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli in Criminal Revision No. 51/2009, whereby the complaint was restored and learned trial Magistrate was directed to proceed in accordance with law in the matter of complaint.

(2.) Facts in brief are that a social worker, by name, Sk. Farid Sk. Suleman, aged about 75 years R/o Aheri, Tq. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli had instituted a complaint against the present applicant Dipak Mallaji Atram. According to complaint, the accused in collusion with one Babu Hakim, Secretary of Van Vaibhav Shikshan Mandal, without verifying the truth and authenticity of the information, made a false and vexatious complaint to the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Nashik accusing the complainant with wild and baseless allegations, using derogatory statements against the complainant in a document addressed to the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Nashik depicting the complainant as a soul motivated, against the Secretary of the Trust alleging that complainant is in hand in glove with revenue officials, with intent to lower down the image of the complainant in the society. According to the complainant all people in the society started looking at the complainant as a man of corrupt nature and loose value as a result of allegations made against him maliciously by the accused. The complainant in protest, sent a notice through his counsel dated 24.8.2007 to the accused which though duly served upon the accused, the accused had not shown any remorse nor replied the same by tendering an apology as called for. On the other hand, the accused had got the fact of complaint published in the newspaper. Under these circumstances, placing reliance upon documentary evidence, such as, paper publications dated 19.7.2007; 23.7.2007 and 28.7.2007 as also copy of the enquiry report dated 5.6.2007; copy of hand bill dated 19.8.2000; copy of notice dated 2324.8.2007 prayed that the accused be tried for the offence of defamation punishable under Section 500 IPC. Verification statement of the complainant was also recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Aheri, in which grievance made by the complainant regarding illegal acts on the part of one Babu Hakim who was the Seretary of Vanvaibhav Shikshan Sanstha as also the publication made against the complainant alleged him as "..." and alleging further that he is a landgrabber in respect of the land belonging to three widows. According to complainant the accused got the news published in daily 'Lokmat' in its issue dated 23.7.2007 in connivance with Mr Babu Hakim in respect of which notice was addressed to the accused. But he had neither replied the same nor expressed any remorse. Under these circumstances, the complaint was instituted against the present applicant. Learned Judicial Magistrate F.C., Aheri who recorded verification statement of the complainant chose to dismiss the complaint under Section 203 Code of Criminal Procedure by order dated 24.11.2008 in Summary Criminal Case No. 4/2008. The complaint was dismissed on the ground that although news is published by daily 'Lokmat' the complainant had not chosen to file a complaint against authorities of daily 'Lokmat'. Thus, the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Aheri decided not to issue process against the accused and dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Code of Criminal Procedure ,

(3.) The said order dated 24.11.2008 dismissing the complaint JMFC Aheri was challenged by complainant in Criminal Revision Application No. 51/2008 before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli who by the impugned judgment and order allowed the Revision and restored the complaint to the file and directed the learned JMFC to proceed further in the matter accordance with law, in the light of the observations made by the learned Principal Sessions Judge. Thus, this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure