Friday, November 22, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Allahabad High Court directs Ghaziabad district judge to investigate orders in defamation case

The Allahabad High Court has directed the District Judge of Ghaziabad to investigate the issuance of two contradictory orders in a defamation case.

A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 filed by Parul Agarwal.

Both cases are arising out of proceedings initiated at the instance of two complainants (husband and wife) against the applicant with regard to an alleged defamation by a news published in multiple newspapers about alleged fraud committed by complainants.

Counsel for applicant has argued at length, however, at this stage the Court takes note that in both cases the Magistrate concerned has passed self contradictory orders on the same date.

By one order passed under Section 203 Cr.P.C complaint was dismissed and by another order passed under Section 204 Cr.P.C applicant is summoned to face trial for offence under Section 500 IPC.

Counsel for applicant has referred said orders in both applications and submitted that the order whereby complaint was dismissed was uploaded on the concerned website though it was unsigned whereas the order whereby applicant was summoned under Section 500 IPC was a signed order.

The Court by order dated 20.05.2024 has sought explanation from the concerned Magistrate, who has filed an affidavit through Sudhir Mehrotra, Advocate, which is on record. The Magistrate concerned has tendered his unconditional apology and explanation is given that staff of his Court has unintentionally uploaded an unsigned and draft order without his consent.

“I have considered the above submissions. Since there are two contrary orders as well as applicant is summoned in both cases by an unreasoned order, therefore, in the light of judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Lalankumar Singh and others vs State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1383 and Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd and Ors Vs State of U.P and Anr, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2248, both orders impugned in these applications are liable to be set aside,” the Court observed.

“In view of above, impugned summoning orders dated 13.02.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case (Ankur Garg vs Smt Parul Agrawal) and (Malika Garg vs Smt Parul Agrawal), under Section 500 IPC, Police Station Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, are hereby set aside. It is also observed that unsigned orders shall not be considered to be part of proceedings.

The Court noted that the FIR lodged against the complainant and its outcome as well as Explanation to Section 500 IPC and that no allegation was made against the publisher of the concerned newspaper.

Matter is remitted back to Trial Court concerned to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after taking note of above referred judgments and after hearing complainant only expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months, if there is no legal impediment,” the order reads.

So far as the conduct of the Magistrate is concerned, the Court found that he was not careful, therefore, an unsigned contrary order was uploaded. He has also not initiated any inquiry against staff concerned. The Court is informed that he is a young Magistrate, therefore, keeping in view of his long career, I am not passing any adverse order.

However, the Court directed the District Judge concerned to initiate an inquiry, under which circumstances staff of the concerned Court had uploaded two unsigned draft orders on the website.

With aforesaid observations/ directions, the Court disposed of the application. 

spot_img

News Update