Allowed

Tribune Trust and Ors. v. Jarnail Singh Mahal and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jul 2012CRM-M/12589/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sued for defamation after a newspaper reported pending criminal cases against the complainant. The court held that information came from RTI records and was published in good faith, quashing the complaint and summons as abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Complaint dated 10.1.2006, summoning order dated 11.12.2006, and subsequent proceedings qua petitioners quashed.

Tribune Trust and Ors. Vs Jarnail Singh Mahal and… — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008 Date of Decision: 6.7.2012.

¶5

The Tribune Trust and others

¶6

......Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Jarnail Singh Mahal and another .......Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶10

Present: Mr. Anand Chhibber, Senior Advocate with Mr. Lalit Thakur, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

None for the respondents.

¶12

¶13

SABINA, J.

¶14

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of complaint dated 10.1.2006 (Annexure P-3) and summoning order dated 11.12.2006 (Annexure P-4).

¶15

The contents of the complaint (Annexure P-3) read as

¶16

under:-

¶17

1. That the complainant is a resident of Quadian, Tehsil Batala District Gurdaspur where he is working as big industrialist, rice sheller owner, cold store owner and have a big landed property. The complainant in former president of Municipal Counsel, Quadian, M.C. Of Quadian and remained member of Punjab Pardesh Congress Committee for ten years. In all, the complainant enjoyed a good social and moral

¶18

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008

¶19

-2-

¶20

reputation in the area of District Gurdaspur.

¶21

2. That the complainant joined Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) on 9.12.2005 and participated in a big Public Relly on the same day. In this rally all senior and respected leaders were present such as S.Sukhbir Singh Badal, Sh. Vinod Khanna, M.P.Gurdaspur. There was gathering of about 25-30 thousands of people.

¶22

3. That in the issue dated 10.12.05 of 'The Tribune'' Jalandhar a News Item was published at Page No. 5 by the accused Nos. 2 to 4. In this news item, it was published that accused No.1 S. Gurdev Singh Thikriwal said “Mr. Jarnail Singh (Complainant) who had joined SAD today, had 11 (eleven) Criminal Cases pending against him. These includes two murder cases, four cases of attempt to murder and two cases of fraud and two cases of smuggling narcotics. He had also been listed 'B' Category Smuggler in the records of Police.'

¶23

4. That this news, item was published by accused No.8 at the instance of accused No.4 without enquiry, regarding its truthfulness. The accused No.2 who is principal of accused No. 3 and 4 is also liable/responsible for the acts of accused Nos. 3 and 4. In fact, this news item was totally wrong and was published only to damage the reputation of the complainant in the eyes of society. No murder cases, attempt to murder cases, cases of fraud of cases of

¶24

-3-

¶25

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008

¶26

smuggling of Narcotics is pending against the complainant in any court of law. The complainant issued a Legal Notice dated 14.12.2005 upon all the accused and asked them to furnish proofs of the same. But till date, no reply has been submitted by anybody. The photocopy of notice and postal receipts is attached herewith.

¶27

5. That the accused No.1 who is Senior Congress Leader and some months ago, was a close friend of the complainant and was party mate of the complainant, if was having knowledge about the bad character of criminal attitude of the complainant then why he did not bring the same in the knowledge of the Senior Congress leaders, and especially when the Complainant was President of Municipal Council Quadian. In fact, the accused No.1 was having jealousy with the popularity of the complainant as such he tried to malign the reputation of the complainant with the help of the other accused.

¶28

6. That the news paper referred above has good deal of circulation in Punjab and is termed as having great circulation. The effect of the imputation made in the news item is that it has brought disgrace to the complainant. This news paper was read by the people in every city. This news paper was read by the people in every city including city Gurdaspur. The friends and relative who recorded the Complainant as upright persons and a man of good moral character, have

¶29

-4-

¶30

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008

¶31

started to show his company and made uncharitable remarks based on the said publication and as such this publication has the prestige, reputation and moral character of the complainant in the estimation of society at large and also in the eyes of friends and relations.

¶32

7. That the nature of the news item and publicity given to it by the accused in the news paper clearly reveal that all this was done with the intention to harm and also knowing and having reasons to believe that the said imputation will harm the reputation of the complainant. As such all the accused are clearly guilty of section 500 IPC.

¶33

8. That the cause of action arose in every city of the Punjab where the imputation was read over the public. Hence, this Hon'ble court is competent to try and entertain the present complaint.

¶34

9. That it is not discovered from the publication as to who were the other persons who planned to give such news item in the News Paper. In case, their identity is discovered during the court proceedings, they too will be under Section 500 IPC.”

¶35

After hearing the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed.

¶36

Complainant has filed the complaint alleging therein that the news item published in the newspaper 'The Tribune' on 10.12.2005 to the effect that 11 criminal cases were pending

¶37

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008

¶38

-5-

¶39

against him amounted to defamation. Petitioners without verifying the contents of the statement made to them by respondent No.2 had published the news item to damage the reputation of the complainant.

¶40

Annexure P-1 is the news item in question which reads

¶41

as under:-

¶42

“ Another Congress leader Gurdev Singh Thikriwal Chairman of the Market Committee alleged that the SAD was packing criminals in its party. He said that Mr. Jarnail Singh, who had joined the SAD today had 11 criminal cases pending against him. These include two murder cases, four cases of attempt to murder and two cases of fraud and two cases of smuggling narcotics. He had also been listed B category smuggler in the records of the police.

¶43

A son of Mr. Jarnail Singh was recently booked for stealing 3,000 bags of wheat from Punjab warehousing godown, he alleged.

¶44

However, sources at the spot said that though Mr. Jarnail Singh might not matter much in terms of votes to the Congress but he could add strength to the muscle power of local Akali leaders.”

¶45

Annexures P-6 and P-7 are the lists of criminal cases registered against the complainant. The said information was received by the petitioners on an application moved by them under Right to Information Act, 2005.

¶46

The news item had been published by the newspaper 'The Tribune' on information supplied by respondent No.2. In view

¶47

Crl. Misc. No. M-12589 of 2008 -6-

¶48

of Annexures P-6 and P-7 the information supplied by respondent No.2 cannot be said to be wrong. Further the news item had been published in good faith and believing it to be correct. Publication of the news item was not with a view to defame the complainant. The correspondent was not expected to hold parallel enquiry into the truthfulness of the information supplied to him. Be that as it may, the information in view of Annexures P-6 and P-7 cannot be said to be incorrect. In these circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be nothing but abuse of process of law.

¶49

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Complaint dated 10.1.2006 (Annexure P-3) and summoning order dated 11.12.2006 (Annexure P-4) and all the subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom qua the petitioners, are quashed.

¶50

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶51

July 06, 2012 Gurpreet

Tribune Trust and Ors. v. Jarnail Singh Mahal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tribune Trust and Ors. v. Jarnail Singh Mahal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balbir Singh Vs Ashok Kumar and Ors.

Gaurav Rai Vs State of Haryana

Baljinder Singh Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Hamir Singh and Anr. Vs Shamsher Singh

Kuljit Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Satish Kumar Vs Sunita Rani