PRABHU CHAWLA Vs. SHIVNATH SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision petition, the scope and meaning of some person aggrieved' in Section 199 Cr. P. C. is to be examined. The Additional C. J. M. , Kota, has taken cognizance, upon a complaint, filed by the non-petitioner one Shri Srinath Soni, who is the President of INstrumentation, Workers Union (INtuc) Kota, for the alleged defamation of the President and the Prime Minister of this Country. An article published in the Hindi version of 'india Today', dated 28th Feb. 1987, under the heading 'khatarnak Takrav' is the writing on basis of which the petitioners, who are the Senior Editor, Chief Editor and the Printer of the magazine, are being proceeded against for the offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 IPC.

(2.) BY this order it is not to be decided whether the words written in the article amount to defamation or not, so the contents may be seen in brief only. The President of India is said to be merely a Rubber Stamp and the Prime Minister is said to be an inexperienced person. The strained relation between the President and the Prime Minister is the basis on which the political situation has been discussed.

(3.) THE first objection of the non-petitioner may be disposed first. Section 397 I. P. C. provides for calling for records to exercise the power of revision and the same has been conferred on the High Court and also the Sessions Judge. Sub-clause (3) provides that if an application under this section has been made by any person, either to the High Court or to the Sessions Judge no further application by the same person shall be entertained by the other of them. This makes it clear that a person can either move the High Court or the Sessions Judge under this section and he has only one opportunity to do so and it is his choice whether he should move before the High Court or to the Sessions Judge. If a person first moves the Sessions Judge and is unable to get relief, he cannot have a second innings before the High Court, but there is no prohibition for approaching the High Court in the first instance.