HINDUSTAN TIMESLTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed seeking annulment of the order dated 4.6.1987 whereby Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur took cognizance of the case in Complaint Case No. 54(C) of 1987.

(2.) Relevant facts are that opposite party No. 2 of this miscellaneous case, Hari Shankar Sahay, filed the aforesaid complaint case alleging therein that on 8.12.1986 and 9.12.1986 certain reports were filed by one Om Prakash Tripathy making certain defamatory allegations against the complainant which amounted to tarnishing his image in public estimation. The complainant came of a reputed political family and he had high connection and he was regarded as a respectable and gentle man in the society. By publishing the reports dated 8.12.1986 and 9.12.1986, the Printer, Publisher, Editor and the Executive Manager of daily 'Hindustan' had committed offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The reports concerned were published under the caption "Astin ke Sanpo ne dus liya George ko". There was another report under the Caption "Manhgai aur jatiye nafrat ka zahar nhir dusne laga avam ko". These reports referred to the defeat of political leader George Fernandis in the bye-election from Banka constituency and the complainant was held responsible for his defeat because he wanted to obtain licence for his cinema hall from District Officers. However, the complainant alleged that the cinema hall concerned was already having a valid licence and he became the sole proprietor of this cinema hall and, therefore, there was no necessity for obtaining any licence for this cinema hall and, as such, the allegations in this connection were false. So the report filed by Om Prakash Tripathy and published by Hindi Daily damaged the reputation of the complainant. He fell from grace in public estimation.

(3.) Before me, it was submitted that the petitioners before this Court are Resident Editor of Daily, the Company in the name and style of The Hindustan Times Ltd., the Editor Shri Binod Mishra and the Executive Manager of the company known as Searchlight Printing House, Patna. There are several Sub-Editors and Chief Editor and the function of the Resident Editor of Daily is to decide policy of the company so as to regulate the publishing and other affairs of the daily. Since there are Sub-Editors, it is not necessary that all reports must be edited by the Editor and, therefore, without having knowledge of the defamatory report concerned, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted. Moreover, in the complaint-petition, there was no averment that the petitioners had any knowledge of the defamatory, article published and hence also no cognizance should have been taken against the petitioners.