AMAR KUMAR SAHU Vs. PANCHANAN TRIPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant assails the order dated 10.6.1991 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jeypore in ICC No.84 of 1987 wherein the Court below has acquitted the respondent under section 256(1), Cr.P.C.

(2.) The backdrop of the case of the complainant is that respondent-editor-publisher-printer of newspaper "Banamani" which is printed and circulated every fortnight. The appellant who is the complainant of the Court below, is in a dignified position in the society. His all brothers are Doctors, Engineers and Advocates. The complainant has business in Rayagada, the then undivided district of Koraput. The complainant being the Director of Gas Company at Jeypore has the respectable position in the society. He is also life Member of Bhubaneswar Club, Bhubaneswar and Rotary Club, Jeypore. It is the further case of the complainant that complainant is wholesale dealer in foreign liquor under the liquor licence at Jeypore and Rayagada. He being the licensee of foreign liquor, has to follow provisions under Excise Manual and at no point of time he was defaulter before the Excise Department.

(3.) It is alleged, inter alia, that the respondent being the editor of the newspaper "Banamani" published a news item on 15.8.1987 under the heading "Bhejal Mada Karabarare Amar Sahoonka Bhumika". Under that title respondent published stories imputing the character of the complainant. It is averred that the respondent has published that the complainant was involved in illegal liquor business being connived with Excise Inspector. Not only the news item spoiled the future but also defamed the business of the complainant by alleging that foreign liquor shop no.7 of Jeypore Town which was situated at Dhapaguda, now under the process of being shifted to the place being managed by the complainant. Complainant averred that the entire allegations made in the newspaper are false and it is published just to tarnish the image of the complainant in society. So the complainant filed a complaint to take cognizance of the offence under sections 500, 501 and 502 I.P.C. against the respondent-accused person. Learned Magistrate after taking cognizance directed respondent to face trial.