3.However, on the reading of the sworn statement, this Court finds that nowhere the complainant has mentioned the name of these petitioners as persons for printed and circulated the offending notice. Furthermore, the alleged defamatory statements are about the parents of the complainant. Admittedly, the parents of the complainant died long back. Though there is no bar for the son to expose of the case of the parents without their names defamed, while prosecuting the perpetrator of the crime the complaint should be specific and ought to have place the materials which would prima facie indicates the alleged defamatory statement was really printed and circulated by the accused persons/petitioners, in the absence of material facts to link the petitioners with the alleged defamatory statement and there is no purpose to proceed with the trial and the petitioner herein who is the prime witness in this case while filing the private complaint in sworn statement is not referred any of these petitioner, the perpetrator of the alleged crime. While So, this case cannot be improved without any other witness or secondary witness.
