The burden of proof under the exceptions to section 499 of the Indian Penal Code falls on the accused, and the court's power to quash the process should be sparingly used.

( 1 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 at length and the matter is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

( 2 ) APPLICANTS are challenging the order of issuance of process dated 15-9-2004 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 24th court, Esplanade, Mumbai and also the complaint which is filed under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 3 ) BRIEF facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding this Criminal application are as under :-

( 4 ) APPLICANTS are associated with hindustan Times Limited which is a company registered and incorporated in New delhi and which is engaged in the business of printing and distribution of Hindustan times News Paper which is published from new Delhi. All the applicants are arraigned as accused in the Criminal Case filed by respondent No. 1 for the offence punishable under sections 500,501,502 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 5 ) RESPONDENT No. l was working in Office of Zonal Director of Narcotics control Bureau, referred to as NCB. He was sent there on deputation from the Customs department which was his parent department. Applicants published an Article in their News Paper on 4-12-2001 which was captioned as "mumbai NCB Chief under CBI scanner". The said Article was written by accused No. 4, applicant No. 4 herein. The complainant filed complaint in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 23rd Court, esplanade, Mumbai against the applicants under Sections 500, 501, 502 read with sections 34, 114 of the Indian Penal Code in which it was alleged that the applicants were guilty of publishing statements which were per se defamatory and, therefore, they were liable to be prosecuted under the aforesaid provisions. The Trial Court issued process on the said complaint and, thereafter, applicants have preferred this application for quashing the process and the said complaint.

( 6 ) THE learned Counsel appearing on behalf of applicants has taken me through the complaint which is filed by the complainant. He has invited my attention to para 4 of the complaint. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that in the said paragraph 4, respondent No. 1 - Complainant himself has made averments from which it can be clearly inferred that there was some tussle between cbi and respondent No. 1. He submitted that from the averments it will be clearly seen that the CBI had written a letter to the Director general, NCB recommending action to be taken against the complainant by falsely alleging that he had plans to plant drugs to implicate CBI officers in false cases. The learned Counsel submitted that though according to the complainant the said allegation was false, there was a clear admission that the CBI had, in fact, written such letter to the Director General, NCB. The 'earned Counsel, thereafter, invited my attention to the Article in question. He submitted that the Article had stated the facts which are not incorrect and which could be seen from the averments made in the complaint itself. He further invited my attention to the affidavit filed by one of the officers of the CBI in proceeding which was initiated by respondent No. 1 in the Central administrative Tribunal. He invited my attention to the averments made in the said affidavit by the Officer of CBI which clearly indicated that certain officers of the CBI were at logger head with respondent No. 1 and there were serious disputes and quarrels which were going on between the two Departments. He further invited my attention to para 6 of the complaint in which respondent No. 1 had admitted that on 19th/20th July, 2001, CBI raided the premises of the NCB and the report had appeared in the News Paper on 22-7-2001 under the caption "narcotics bureau men caught in CBI net". It is submitted that the complainant had categorically stated that the said Article did not make any false allegations or imputations against the complainant. Thus, from averments in the co