(1.) PAWAN Kumar has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings which were initiated on the basis of a calendra bearing No. 435/1 of 1991 State v. Pawan Kumar and the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal on 28.10.1992, Annexure P.4.
(2.) IT is stated in the petition that the petitioner is a Press Reporter of 'Punjab Kesari' and 'Dainik Tribune' that he published news item about the misdeeds of Sh. Niranjan Lal in his newspaper and that Niranjan Lal threatened the petitioner with dire consequences. According to the petitioner he was threatened twice or thrice on telephone and he made a complaint in writing through registered letter to the Deputy Commissioner. Copy of the complaint is Annexure P.1.
(3.) NOTICE of this petition was given and reply has been filed on behalf of Inspector-Manohar Lal S.H.O. Police Station Sadar, Kaithal. It has been stated in para 2 of the reply that on the basis of a complaint DDR No. 19 dated 14.12.1988 was recorded in police Post, Siwan, under the jurisdiction of Police Station Sadar, Kaithal. It has been further mentioned in para 2 that Niranjan Lal son of Thakur Dass filed a complaint under Section 500/501, Indian Penal Code against Pawan Kumar for publishing the defamatory imputation in his papers and the same is pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal for 6.4.1993 for complainant's evidence after the notice has been issued to Pawan Kumar petitioner. It has been further stated that during the investigation, it was found that Niranjan Lal has never given threat of dire consequences to the petitioner and as such the information given in writing to the incharge police post was found false and resultantly the calendra under Section 182 Indian Penal Code was made and proceedings were initiated. In para 3 of the reply, the contents of para 3 of the petition have been denied. It is further mentioned in reply that it is totally wrong that the application (complaint), Annexure P-1, was only given to the Deputy Commissioner, Kurukshetra, rather the information was given simultaneously to the persons named in the application itself including the Incharge, Police Post, Siwan. It is further mentioned that complaint dated 13.12.1988 was received in Police Post on 14.12.1988 through registered post and a report at serial No. 19 was duly entered in the daily diary of the Police Post on the same day and the investigation was taken up by Sh. Rattan Singh, the then A.S.I. Incharge, Police Post, Siwan. It is further mentioned in para 3 of the reply that though the different authorities/officers mentioned in the said complaint, sent the complaint in question for necessary action after 14.12.1988 yet by then the investigation had already been started vide report No. 19 dated 14.12.1988 in daily diary of Police Post, Siwan. It is further mentioned that the complainant, Chand Ram, being the S.H.O., Officer Incharge of Police Station Sadar, Kaithal under whose jurisdiction the Police Post, Siwan falls was the public servant concerned to lodge the present complaint in his own right independently of other officers/authorities. It has been further stated in reply that the false information has been given to A.S.I. Incharge, Police Post, Siwan and the complaint has been filed by S.H.O. who is superior officer Incharge of Police Post, Siwan. It is further mentioned that the investigation was not taken up at the instance of Deputy Commissioner, Kurukshetra or any other superior officer rather the same was taken up independently by the then Incharge, Police Post, Siwan and calendra has been initiated at the instance of Sh. Chandgi Ram S.H.O. Incharge of Police Station Sadar, Kaithal in his own capacity being the Controlling Authority of the said Police Post and thus the provision of Section 195(1) Code of Criminal Procedure has fully been complied with and Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has jurisdiction to entertain and try the aforesaid calendra, Annexure P-3.