CHARANJI LAL Vs. DEV RAJ KALRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S .P. Goyal, J. found conflicting views of many other High Courts in regard to the matter as to whether a statement made to the police during interrogation expressing suspicion against a person concerning a report of theft would be a privileged document or would be subject to qualified privilege. Since there was no decision of this Court, the matter was referred to be decided by a Division Bench: This is how the appeal has been placed before us.

(2.) AFTER going through the detailed facts, we are of the opinion that the point referred does not arise in this case, as would be clear from the facts which would be detailed in the latter part of the judgment. Accordingly, we refrain from going into the question lest it is said that our, decision is, obiter.

(3.) THE trial Court came to the conclusion that the statement made in the gathering that the plaintiff was more than 100% thief amounted to defamation and decreed the suit and awarded Rs. 2700/ -as damages.