(1.) Petitioners complaint against the Opposite Parties for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC) having been dismissed, present application has been filed for revision under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the TCode).
(2.) Petitioner filed a complaint inter alia stating that on account of a publication in the daily newspaper The Pragatibadi, under the heading Sambada Patra Agent Ku Akramana published with the intention to defame him, he was defamed, and the Opposite Parties (the news-reporter, Publisher, Managing Director and Editor of the concerned newspaper) were liable for punishment in terms of Section 500, IPC. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of the Code, being of the view that the publication was protected in terms of Fourth Exception of Sec. 499, IPC.
(3.) The learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that at the stage of cognizance, the Court is not concerned with the possible defence and is not empowered to consider applicability of Fourth Exception to Sec. 499, IPC. Additionally it is submitted that the news item in question did not relate in its entirety to proceeding in ICC 5 of 1993 before the learned JMFC, Banpur, therefore the news-item being not hi connection with a judicial proceeding was covered by Fourth Exception to Sec. 499, IPC. Mr. B.B. Mohanty, learned Counsel for Opp. Party Nos. 2, 3 and 5 on the other hand submitted that at the time of taking cognizance, the Court can also look into possible defence. Even though he accepted that the entire news item did not relate to ICC 5 of 1993 of the Court of JMFC, Banpur, yet he submitted that the news item related to another judicial proceeding, and therefore, was clearly covered by the Exception. He filed a certified copy of the First Information Report dated 27-12-1992 in OR Case No. 246 of 1992 of the Court, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur.