IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3338 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
1. N S MALLESHAPPA S/O LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, EX-PRESIDENT AND PRESENT MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O NARASIPURA VILLAGE, HIRENALLUR POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 2. RATHNAMMA W/O REVANASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O. KEDIGERE VILLAGE, HIRENALLUR POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 3. H.A. THIMMAPPA S/O LATE ADAVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O. HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST KADUR TALUK-577548.
4. H.B. GANGADHARACHAR S/O LATE BHASKARACHAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 5. K.H. SURESH S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, MEMBER,HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O KEDIGERE VILLAGE, HIRENALLUR POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 6. H.T.KALLESHAPPA S/O LATE THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST KADUR TALUK-577548 7. SAROJAMMA W/O CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, PRESIDENT, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR KAVAL AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 8. SHANTHAMMA W/O THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 9. H.G. CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 10. KAVITHA W/O DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548 11. G.P PRABHU KUMAR S/O LATE PARAMESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, MEMBER, KADUR TALUK PANCHAYATH, R/O. GIRIYAPURA VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548.
12. H.B. PUTTAPPA S/O LATE BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, EX-PRESIDENT, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548.
13. B.M. HONNAMMA W/O H.T. CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O S/C COLONY, HIRENNALLUR VILLAGE AND POST KADUR TALUK-577548. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRIYUTHS A DHARMESH FOR SHARATH GOWDA G B-ADVOCATES) AND SMT C R SUNITHA W/O H.M JAGADEESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST AND MEMBER, HIRENALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, HIRENALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK-577548. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: A.N. RADHAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S. 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.694/13 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHIKMAGALUR.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for respondent. Perused the records.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the registration of criminal case against them in C.C.No.694/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 500, 501, 503 of IPC r/w.34 of IPC.
3. Respondent herein filed a private complaint before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM interalia contending that the petitioners herein in furtherance of their conspiracy gave a false representation to the paper and got published an article in ‘Prajavani’, Kannada Daily Newspaper, on 31.10.2011 at page 3 containing defamatory statements that the complainant herein was involved in misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs.24 lakh and cheated the members of Mahila Sangha by drawing the said money under the caption “UÁæ.¥ÀA.¸ÀzÀ¸Éå ªÀAZÀ£É :
DgÉÆÃ¥À.” It is further alleged that the petitioners herein got published an article in ‘Star of Bangalore’ Newspaper dated 10.2.2012 at page No.2, continued at page No.10, containing defamatory statement to the effect that the complainant was involved in misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs.24 lakh and cheated the members of Mahila Sangha by drawing the said money from the Bank under the caption “PÀqÀÆgÀÄ PÀÄr ©eɦ °ÃqÀgï ¸ÀĤvÁ «gÀÄzÀÝ J¥sï.L.Dgï.“ 4. According to the complainant, the contents of these articles are per se defamatory and the same have been published by the petitioners with an intention to defame the respondent/complainant. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences, issued summons to the petitioners. At that stage, the petitioners have approached this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relying on the relevant contents of the publication submitted that the said publication was a news item published by the reporter in respect of the protest held by the members of the Women Association regarding the alleged misappropriation committed by the complainant. There is nothing in those articles to show that the publications were made either by the petitioners or at their instance. Under the said circumstance, the learned Magistrate has erred in taking cognizance of the offences and therefore of the prosecution of the petitioners on the basis of the said charge is wholly illegal and an abuse of the process of the Court.
6. Refuting the submissions, learned counsel for respondent while referring to the very same article highlighted that the presence of the petitioners has been mentioned in the said article making it evident that the offending publications was made solely at the instance of the petitioners. The contents of the publications are perse defamatory and in the said circumstance, there is no reason to quash the proceedings at this stage as the allegations made in the publication squarely establish the ingredients of the offences under Section 499 of IPC.
7. Considered the submissions and perused the documents.
8. I have carefully gone through the offending publication.
A bare reading of the said publication reveals that in respect of the protest held by the members of the women association, a news report has been published in the above newspapers to the effect that about 80 women belonging to 8 Women Association held a protest in front of the Tahsildar’s office and submitted a representation to the Tahsildar complaining of certain misdeeds of respondent/complainant who was then a Member of the Grama Panchayath. It was alleged therein that during the protest petition, the Tahsildar was apprised of the fact that the respondent had withdrawn a sum of Rs.3.5 lakh by presenting fake cheques. The contents of these publications go to show that the news item was published with regard to the protest and the representation submitted by the petitioners. No doubt in the said publication it was stated that some of the petitioners were present but their presence in the protest does not render them culpable under Section 500 of IPC. In order to constitute an offence under Section 499 of IPC punishable under Section 500 of IPC, there must be essentially a publication of any imputation concerning any person with an intention to harm the reputation of the persons. A reading of the impugned publication does not indicate that any of the petitioners have made any imputations against the respondent. On the other hand, a plain reading of the said publication indicates that it is a mere publication of news item in respect of the protest organized by the members of the women association. Therefore, in my view, the basic essential ingredient of Section 499 of IPC is not attracted to the facts of the case.
9. Coming to the second publication relied on by the petitioners in “Star of Bengaluru” is concerned, the very caption of the said publication indicates that it was based on FIR lodged against the respondent. There is no denial of the fact that such an FIR was lodged against the complainant/respondent alleging misappropriation and cheating. Under the said circumstance, a report published with regard to the F.I.R registered by the public authorities cannot attract the offence under Section 499 of IPC. Even otherwise, there is nothing in the said publication to suggest that the said publication was made by the petitioners with a view to harm the reputation of the respondent.
10. Since the petitioners are sought to be prosecuted on the basis of the aforesaid publications, in the absence of any material to show that the said publications have been made by the petitioners or at their instance, in my view, prosecution of the petitioners cannot be sustained.
Consequently, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.694/2013 pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chikmagalur are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE rs