SAMIR JAIN ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Vs. ABHIJIT CHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to Quash the issue of process against the Petitioner in Criminal Case No.171 of 1989 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pune. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mrs. Pawar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Mrs. Pingulkar. None appears for the first Respondent.

(2.) THE first Respondent-original complainant filed a private complaint in the court below against 5 accused alleging that they have committed an offence under Section 500 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. THE allegation is that there was an article in the newspaper "Independent" dated 19.10.1989 in which article appeared making certain comments on the personality of Shri Yeshwantrao Chavan. It is stated in the complaint that Shri Yeshwantrao Chavan was a great leader and former Deputy Prime Minister and former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, that the impugned article has caused tremendous emotional hardship to the complainant and the members of his family and the people in general. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were made parties being the authors of the article in question, the third accused is made accused being the printer and the publication of the Daily, the first accused is made a party on the ground that he is the Editor and the 5th accused is made a party on the ground that he is the owner of the daily newspaper. Being aggrieved by the issue of process, the 5th accused-Samir Jain has approached this Court by filing this writ Petition.

(3.) APART from this, we also find that after publication of the impugned article on 19.10.19898, within few days, the same paper has published an article with bold letters with a caption "Apology", along with the photograph of shri Y.B.chavan. It is stated in the apology news item that the Editor regrets for publication of such article on 19th October which was of course published in good faith and without any intention of hurting anyone's reputation or hurting the sentiments of any group or community. It is also mentioned that the Editor has highest esteem for Shri Chavan who had an illustrious career as a freedom fighter, chief minister of undivided Bombay and Maharashtra and ultimately, the Deputy Prime Minister of India. In my view, this publication of apology is sufficient to meet wounded feelings of the complainant. As far as the issue of process against Petitioner is concerned, it can not be sustained. Whether in view of the apology published by the Editor, the complainant wants to proceed against the other accused is left to him. We are not concerned with the issue of process to other accused who have not challenged the issue of process.