The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has quashed a criminal defamation complaint case filed against MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
A Single Bench of Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan passed this order while hearing an application filed by Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
The application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C by the applicant- Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh for quashing of the order dated 10.01.2024, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III (MP/ MLA), Lucknow in Complaint Case, whereby the applicant has been summoned to face trial U/S 500 IPC.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the trial Court has passed the impugned order without application of mind and simply on the basis of recording of the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and of his witnesses recorded under Section 202 CrPC, the applicant/ accused person has been summoned to face trial for committing offence under Section 500 IPC.
It is further submitted the trial Court has also not considered the amended provision of Section 202 Cr.P.C whereby it is obligatory on the part of the trial Court to either enquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by any other person for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient grounds for proceeding as the applicant/ accused was a resident of another district. Thus, the trial Court has failed in ascertaining the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the sufficiency of material which may warrant the summoning of the applicant for committing the offence under Section 500 IPC.
It is also submitted that letters, which are stated to have been written by the applicant are confidential documents and there is no iota of evidence or material which may even remotely suggest that it was the applicant who had leaked these papers in the media and there is also no material or evidence which may suggest that on the basis of these letters, the recognition of the newspaper of the complainant was cancelled.
AGA on the other hand submits that since it is a complaint case, it is for this Court to assess the propriety of the order passed by the trial Court.
The Court observed that,
The case of the complainant appears to be that two letters of date 25.09.2022 were written by the applicant/ accused persons to the Hon’ble Chief Minister and Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh and the language used therein is defamatory so far as the applicant is concerned.
A copy of the complaint has been placed on record, which would demonstrate that the substance of both these letters have been placed in the complaint itself in the complaint wherein it is stated that various criminal cases pertaining to hatching conspiracy of exhortation, intimidation, theft and of molestation are registered against the complainant in different police stations and various newspapers have been registered by complainant giving different addresses and also that while he was pursuing his LLB, he was acting as a full fledged freelance journalist.
The perusal of the noted case laws would sufficiently demonstrate that summoning in a criminal matter is a serious business and the Magistrate or the Trial Court, as the case may be, is obliged to go through the allegations levelled in the complaint in order to ascertain as to whether there are sufficient grounds for proceedings are existing and these sufficient grounds for proceeding further must be distinguished from sufficient ground for conviction, as the duty of the Magistrate is to assess the sufficiency of grounds only for moving further and not for conviction.
Having regard to the amendment made under Section 202 Cr.P.C, it is incumbent on the Magistrate or the Trial Court, as the case may be, to either make an enquiry himself or to refer an investigation under Section 202 Cr.P.C., if the proposed accused person is resident of another district. The purpose of this inquiry or investigation, as the case may be, is to safeguard the interest of a proposed accused, who may be arrayed as an accused only on the basis of rivalry or for any other ulterior motive.
Thus, this provision has been added in order to put the Magistrate or the Trial Court, as the case may be, on guard that if the material provided by the complainant/ informant is not sufficient enough, he is required to collect the material by ordering an investigation under Section 202 Cr.P.C.
It is also not res-integra that the investigation as contemplated under Section 202 Cr.P.C is different from the investigation, which may be ordered under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C, as under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C, the Magistrate can order investigation before taking cognizance while under Section 202 Cr.P.C, the Magistrate can order investigation after taking cognizance in order to satisfy himself that there are sufficient material or grounds exist for summoning a proposed accused person.
The Court further observed that,
It is also to be recalled that as a public representative, certain issues are brought in the knowledge of the public representatives and the same may be based on the perception of the applicant in the mind of those, who have made the complaint about the complainant to the public representatives and it is in this regard, it cannot be said that the letters which have been written by the applicant have been written intentionally with a motive to tarnish the image of the complainant/ opposite party No 2 and these letters appear to have been written, so that public authorities may be made aware of the grievances of the persons, to whom applicant is representing. Moreover, there is no iota of evidence, which may suggest that these letters which appear to be of confidential nature, have been published in the newspapers or in the social media platforms by the applicant himself and therefore, so far as the publication of these letters is concerned, the same cannot be associated with the applicant.
In view of the facts and circumstance of the case, the impugned letters appears to have not been written or communicated to complainant and as stated earlier, these letters appears to be confidential and privileged communication and there is no material on record, which may suggest even remotely that it is applicant, who had caused these letters published in the print media or digital media or on social media platforms. Thus, ingredients of Section 499 I.P.C are not attractive in the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that proceedings of the case have been initiated without there being any sufficient grounds. The trial Court fails in not discussing the ingredients of the offence and there appears no evidence which may suggest even prima facie that it was the applicant, who has published or provided the impugned letters for publication in the newspapers or social media platforms. The letters appear to be privileged communication between two constitutional authorities. Applicant himself has a criminal history of three cases.
“The statements of complainant and his witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC are cryptic and are not attracting ingredients of offence under Section 499 IPC. The letters also appear to have fallen in 8th Exception of Section 499 I.P.C. The trial Court has also not followed the procedure laid down in amended provision of Section 202 CrPC and the exercise done by it may not be termed as inquiry. The trial Court has not directed any investigation under 202 CrPC even when the material available before it was not sufficient to summon the applicant to face trial under Section 500 IPC. Thus, the instant case appears to be covered by guideline No 1 and 7 of Bhajan Lal (supra) and Exception Eighth of Section 499 IPC. Thus, I am of the considered view that permitting these criminal proceedings to continue against the applicant, would be nothing but abuse of process of law/ Court and requires interference of the Court”, the Court also observed while allowing the application.
In result, the summoning order dated 10.01.2024 passed by the trial Court in Complaint Case is set aside and all the proceedings of the above case are quashed, the Court ordered.