A P JAIRATH Vs. WAZIR CHANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner Sri AP Jairath appearing in person submits that the findings recorded by the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, that he is not an aggrieved person to maintain the complaint lodged against the respondent accusing him of an offence of defamation and that in any event the complaint is barred by time under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, are manifestly erroneous. The defematoryremaiks as the c'omplaint reads, were leyelled against the daughter of the Petitioner, doubting her chastity and character in the original petition instituted by the petitioner acting as the General Power of Attorney of his daughter. The remarks if true, certainly lower down the reputation of the family of the petitioner closely linked up with that of his daughter. In this view it cannot be said that the petitioner is not an aggrieved person. Also the defamatory remarks relied upon in the complaint were made from time to time by the respondant. The last occasion was on 23-2-1980. The complaint having been filed within 3 years from the date of defamatory remarks made by the respondent on the last occasion, is also well in time.

(2.) However, I decline to interfere with the impugned order as in the complaint itself it is asserted that the defamatory remarks were communicatld to him by the daughter of the petitioner herself and that she is author of the same. In as much as in the Original petition the daughter of the petitioner did not examine herself to refute the true or otherwise of the authorship of the defamatory remarks, there is no purpose prosecuting the complaint.

(3.) The Criminal Revision Case is, therefore dismissed.