S S SANYAL Vs. K V R NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application the accused petitioners want the quashing of the proceeding being case No. C/991/83 under Ss.500 and 506 of the Penal Code pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta. The facts leading to the present revisional application may be summarised as follows :-

(2.) The present petitioners together with 7 others are President and other persons incharge of India Foils Ltd. The Opposite party complainant is the Vice-President of India Foils Staff Association. Admittedly the Association was in exclusive possession of a room in the Company's office at 4, Mango Lane with a steel cup-board in it. The Association was asked to handover the possession of this room together with the steel cup-board on or about 4/2/1983. On 5/2 /83 in the presence of three representatives from the side of the Company (accused Nos. 6, 7 and 8), the contents of the steel cup-board were being removed when the presence of certain duplicate copies and/or Xerox copies of circulars and/or pay sheets and/or sales list etc. were found in it. Those papers were handed-over to the said three representatives on a receipt. It is urged from the side of the opposite party that on 7/2/83 the complainant-opposite party was called to the chamber of the accused petitioner No. 1 in presence of others when the accused petitioner No. 1 threatened the complainant-opposite party with dire consequences and even went to the extent of saying that the complainant-opposite party's days were numbered.

(3.) Thereafter on 8/2/83 the complainant-opposite party was served with a charge-sheet alleging that he along with other office-bearers of the Staff Association had removed surreptitiously and dishonestly the aforementioned vital and confidential documents of the Company and had concealed them unauthorisedly for wrongful gain and motives. Alleging that the statements made in the charge-sheet accused him of stealing the papers mentioned above thus lowering down his prestige in the estimations of the other employees of the Company, the complainant-opposite party lodged complaint against the present petitioners and several others under Ss.500, 504 and 506 read with S.120B of the Penal Code considering the materials on record the learned Magistrate issued process against the present two accused petitioners only. Hence, this revisional application alleging that the statements of the charge-sheet were not defamatory and further that there was no publications of defamation, if any in this case.