4.Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused, would vehemently contend that prior to the filing of the private complaint, the respondent/complainant has sent a legal notice, dated 27.11.2006, wherein nothing has been stated about the presence of persons before whom the petitioner/accused said to have uttered/abused the words. It is further contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that as per Explanation 4 to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, no imputation is said to harm a person's reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful and in view of the early stand taken by the respondent/complainant in the legal notice, the present complaint alleging defamation is not sustainable and hence, prays for quashing of the said proceedings.
