H.N. Nagamohan Das, J. ”In this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 3.8.2011 in C.C. No. 27030/2011 passed by the VIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore registering the case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 500 IPC and issuing summons. Petitioner is an IAS officer and retired as Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Karnataka. Respondent is senior IPS Officer, presently working as Inspector General of Police (planning and modernization). Petitioner while working as Principal Secretary to the Government, wrote a letter on 09.02.2007 to the then Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka. The relevant portion of this letter for the purpose of this case is as under:

I have functioned in DPAR for three-and-half years without any allegation against me from any source and the records would speak for themselves in the cases of Sri. R.P. Sharma and his wife also. I may state that by the grace of God, my integrity and reputation have been without a blemish throughout my career spanning 32 years. It is a pity that I have to suffer the indignities from Sri R.P. Sharma whose integrity and reputation may have to be judged by the circumstances under which disciplinary action had been initiated against him by the Government in the past. Although he has stated that I have defamed him and sought permission to prosecute me it is he who has defamed me by making false allegations before Courts and before my colleagues and superiors from 2003 onwards.

(Underlining is by me)

2. Respondent contends that the petitioner has got personal animosity against him and suffered various humiliations, indignity and defamation in the hands of petitioner. Petitioner with an intention to harm the reputation of the respondent had been engaged in malicious campaign for the last many years. In furtherance of and with a motive to scandalize, defame and touching the character and conduct of the respondent, petitioner had written the above letter. On account of the allegations made in the above letter, the reputation of the petitioner became a laughing stock among large number of people. Therefore, the respondent filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.PC in PCR No. 3444/2010 on the file of the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 500, 501 and 502 IPC. The jurisdictional Magistrate had taken cognizance of the case, recorded the sworn statement and passed an order on 02.11.2010 dismissing the complaint. Respondent questioned this order of dismissal in Crl.R.P. No. 387/2010. The revisional court vide order dated 24.05.2011 set aside the order of Magistrate and remanded the matter for fresh disposal. After remand the Magistrate has passed the impugned order issuing summons to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is before this court questioning the impugned order passed by the Magistrate.

3. Sri H.M. Muralidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the letter dated 9.2.2007 was a confidential letter addressed and sent only to the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka and the same was not sent to any other person. Even in this letter factual information is furnished and no defamatory allegations are made against the respondent. Even this letter written by the petitioner was by way of reply to the petition given by the respondent on 12.05.2006 and 12.07.2006 making personal allegations against the petitioner. The allegations made in the letter dated 09.02.2007 even if they are taken as true do not constitute an offence as defined under Section 499 IPC. The intention of the respondent in filing the complaint is only to harass and intimidate the petitioner. This is nothing but abuse of process of law. Therefore the proceedings before the Magistrate are liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, Sri Suman, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the petitioner is engaged continuously in defaming the character of