Smt. Anju Kulshrestha vs Harvijai Singh and Another

Palok Basu, J.—Smt. Anju Kulshrestha has preferred this application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer that the complaint and further proceedings in case No. 477 of 1991 under Sections 500, 504, 506 and 511, I.P.C. pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi may be quashed.

List has been revised. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the applicant but Sri. Ramendra Asthana has put In appearance on behalf of the opposite-party No. 1-Complainant, namely, Harvljai Singh and has argued that the complaint may be permitted to proceed and the order of the Magistrate by which the applicant Smt. Anju Kulshrestha has been summoned to appear may be sustained.

Having perused the materials it cannot be said that even prima facie offence stands disclosed which may be said to be punishable u/s 500. I.P.C. and, therefore, the application has to succeed.

Translated into English the gist of the allegations made in the complaint which consists of 17 paragraphs is as under:

''The complaint is being filed on behalf of Smt. Vimla Srivastava (64 years) who may not be compelled to appear in public as per the local customs and manners. Smt. Vimla Srivastava has four daughters. The complainant is a retired Subedar from the Army and his family commands good reputation. The accused sent a registered letter on 22nd February, 1990 which was received on 24th February, 1990 at 2.30 p.m. addressed to Smt. Vimla Srivastava at her residence at Jhansi. When the aforesaid letter was received by her she got fainted. The family members present at that time and one Sri Rameshwar Prasad Sahu, an Electrician, rushed to her and gave her first-aid and read out the contents of the letter which was the cause of her unconsciousness. The letter was written with the object to assassinate the character of Smt. Vimla Srivastava. The contents of the letter are false and defamatory and Smt. Vimla Srivastava is adamant to commit suicide because of that allegation which were detailed as under:

(a) Eaisa Mat Sochiyega Ki Hamey Pata Nahi Hai Ki Hamari Jwellery Apney Chura Li Hai Aur Apkoe Aisa Kartey Meghna Ney Dekha Bhi Hai Vah Bechari To Soch Bhi Nahi Sakti Thi Ki Aap Suitcase Sey Jwellery Nikal Rahi Hai.

(b) Socha Bhi Na Tha Ki Apney Apna Kaam Kar Liya Hai.

(c) Aap Kya Yah Apni Beti Key Saath Bhi Karti Hai.

(d) Apk1 Harkato Ka To Ham Logo Ko Salo Sey Pata Hai, 200, 600 Rupiya Ka Va Choti Moti Cheezo Ka Nuksaan Sirf Do Karno Sey Sah Jatey They.

(e) Aap Ney Kab Kab Kya Kya Cheezey Churayi Hai Sab Pata Hai Sirf Hamey Hi Nahi Balki Kay1 Logo Ko Mami Lila Mausi Barey Mama Aur Nanaji Apney Raju Ki Shad Mey Bhi Hath Saf Kiya Aur Dinesh Chacha Ki Maut Par Bhi Kya Apka Eman So Gaya Hai.

''Some exchange of notices took place followed by some other registered letters. The imputations in the letter dated 22.2.1990 are false and defamatory written with criminal intentions to Smt. Vimla Srivastava who is permanently living at Jhansi, therefore, conferring jurisdiction to the court at Jhansi.''

''Smt. Vimla Srivastava has become sick from the time she received the said letter and her blood pressure has gone high. She is not taking the usual diet. Her health has been materially deteriorated and she can commit suicide at any moment. Her life has become a hell. The members of her family have been defamed by the accused and their reputation has been lowered down in relations, friends and society.''

One of the witnesses examined u/s 202, Code of Criminal Procedure was Rameshwar Prasad Sahu. A copy of his statement was filed as Annexure-C-1 to the affidavit in support of this application. His statement was that it was a registered closed letter which was opened by Smt. Vimla Srivastava, she read it herself and after reading at she fell down. He says that after she had fallen down, he took the letter from Smt. Vimla Srivastava and read it himself as a result of which the prestige of the family of Smt. Vimla Srivastava was lowered down in his estimation.

The ingredients which go to create an offence punishable u/s 499, I.P.C. are that the words either spoken or intended to be read, should make or publish any imputation concerning any person intending to harm or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person.

The gist of the offences of the defamation, therefore, lies in lowering down the reputation of the person concerned or his family in the estimation of others. So long as the accused is not saddled with the responsibility of having intentionally done some such things which have the effect of lowering down the reputation of the person in the estimation of others, the charge of defamation cannot be said to have been made out at all. This is exactly what is the result of the aforesaid discussion. By the very prosecution evidence the accused is said to have sent the closed letter of the person concerned who read it herself. Therefore, the accused cannot be said to have intended to lower the reputation of the accused in the estimation of others. If somebody else took upon himself to pick up the letter and read it, the accused cannot be said to be directly or indirectly responsible for the publication of the statement contained in the said letter. Consequently, the charge of defamation cannot be said to have been made out from what has been said above. Therefore, the entire proceedings and the orders passed by the Court below have no legs to stand and have to be quashed.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure is allowed and the complaint under Sections 500, 504, 506 and 511, I.P.C. pending in the court of C.J.M. Jhansi as well as all orders and proceedings therein are quashed.