GOKULDAS KASHINATH NAIK Vs. KISHORE SADA NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. The present appeal arises from the order passed by the Lower Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.19/2005 delivered on 30th July, 2005 whereby the appeal filed by the respondent No.1 against the judgment of the trial Court dated 14.3.2005 in a private Criminal case No.146/1998/C, was allowed and the trial Court's judgment holding the respondent No.1 to be guilty of the offence punishable U/s.500 of I.P.C. with imposition of sentence of one month's imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- was set aside.

(2.) The appellant is the Chairman of the Neura-O-Grande Tenants Association and claims to be a well known public leader with no criminal background and his reputation being without blemish. The respondent No.1 is a teacher by profession and also a reporter of the Marathi Newspaper 'Daily Gomantak'. Some of the articles published in 'Daily Gomantak' at the instance of the respondent No.1 as its reporter were found to be objectionable to the appellant, as according to the appellant they were defamatory in the nature, and the appellant, therefore, filed a private criminal complaint being Private Criminal Case No.146/1998/C in the Court of J.M.F.C., Panaji. After hearing the appellant and his witnesses, by its judgment dated 14.3.2005, the trial Court held the respondent to be guilty of the offence punishable U/s.500 of I.P.C. and imposed punishment of simple imprisonment for a period of one month with fine of Rs.5,000/- and out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.4,000/- was directed to be paid to the appellant as the compensation. In fact, the prosecution was also against a teacher / reporter of the Newspaper 'Daily Gomantak', however, during the pendency of the trial, the said accused person expired. Being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the respondent preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge which came to be heard by IInd Additional District Judge, Panaji, who by her order dated 30.07.2007 set aside the order passed by the trial Court and acquitted the respondent. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Placing reliance upon the decision in the matter of Sewakram Sobhani Versus R.K. Karanjiya, Chief Editor,reported in AIR 1981, S.C. 1514 and Alex Pimento and another Versus Emperor, reported in AIR 1920, Bombay, 339 the learned senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Lower Appellate Court has arrived at a clear finding that though the evidence on record discloses that the articles published in relation to the appellant clearly revealed doubt about the integrity of the appellant, in view of the statements of the witnesses that they did not believe in those articles, wrongly applying the explanation clause 4 of of Section 499 of I.P.C. to the facts of the case, the Lower Appellate Court set aside the judgment passed by the trial Court ignoring the import of the said explanation clause, and virtually misconstrued the said provision. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that in the absence of proper evidence on record, the Lower Appellate Court has rightly set aside the conviction of the respondent and, therefore, there is no case for interference in the order passed by the Lower Appellate Court.