Abdul Salam vs Ghulam Ahmed Magrey

Ghulam Ahmad Magrey, respondent, had filed a complaint under section 500/109 R.P.C against Abdul Salam, petitioner and Respondents 2 to

4, Printer, proprietor and Editor of Daily Aftab , Srinagar on allegation that Abdul Salam, in connivance and league with respondents No. 2 to 4,

printed and published a news item in the Daily Aftab of 2851981 issue, concerning Gulam Ahmad Magrey imputing to him allegations of

misappropriation of the funds of Drugmulla Panchayat District Kupwara and clinching of Theaka of impounding cattle in the pound to himself in

breach of the rules. All this has brought him in disrespect, affected his reputation and fairname and it has caused severe pain to the complainant. He

has been defamed.

The Sub judge (Judicial Magistrate) Kupwara on examination of the complainant and one witness Ail Mir, took cognisance of the complaint

under section 500/109 R.P.C and issued bailable warrants against the accused petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 for causing their appearance

before the court. This order of 361981 of the judicial Magistrate, Kupwara is impugned in this petition under section 561ACr.PC

The petitioner has not and is not appearing in this case for the last over eleven years .Respondents too are not appearing in this case for the last

over eleven years Respondents too are not appearing despite service. The case has been examined, record perused and matter considered.

The reading of article in ""Daily Aftab"" of 28th May, 1981 issue, reveals that the news item is concerning a meeting of 'Peoples Conference', a

political outfit of the time, under the Chairmanship of Ghulam Hassan Malik, accused, executive member of the Panchayat Drugmulla, in which

stock was taken of the functioning of the Drugmulla panchayat and serious concern expressed against misappropriation in and incompetence of the

Panchayat. Besides, the complainant Ghulam Ahmd Magrey, Deputy Sarpanch of the Panchayat, as on that date, was also discussed and it was

felt that he obtained Panchayat Village Pound for impounding the cattle, against the Panchayat rules. This is in total what the news item says. It

would be seen that the news item as such imputing certain acts of omission and commission to the Panchayat, including its members and the

Deputy Sarpanch, is not with intention or knowledge to harm the reputation of the complainant and the Deputy Sarpanch. The news item and the

imputation do not lower the character or credit of the complainant in the estimation of others. It is just publishing of proceedings of the meeting of a

political outfit, opposed to the party to which the complainant belonged. The proceedings touch and express opinion regarding functioning of the

Panchayat. The publication of proceedings of the meeting and expressing opinion on the merits of the performance of the office bearers of the

panchayat appear to be in good faith for protection of interests of the public and focus on the public good as seen by the outfit presided over by

the petitioner, which publication and printing cannot be said to be defamation.

The complainant and the witnesses in their summary statements have not disclosed and made out, factually the ingredients of the offence for

defamation as defined under Section 499 RPC and made punishable under Section 500 RPC. Making and publication of alleged defamatory

articles with intention to harm the complainant or knowing or having the reasons to believe that it will harm the reputation of the complainant is not

at all made out. It is also not made out on combined reading of the statements and the news item that the said imputation directly or indirectly

lowers the character or credit or disgrace the complainant in the estimation of others.

For the aforesaid reasons, the cognisance of the complaint under Section 500 R.PC vide order dated 361981 of Sub Judge (Judicial

Magistrate), Kupwara is sheer abuse of process of Court. The order is accordingly quashed. Record he sent back to the trial court alongwith

certified copy of the decision.