These petitions filed under section 482 of the Code (Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) can be disposed of as revision petitions filed under section 397 of the Code. All the three petitions arise from C.C. 121/04/A and since facts are common, and so also the law applicable thereto, they can be disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. The applicant is the complainant and the private respondents were the accused involved in the said case against whom process was issued by the learned C.J.M. by order dated 9-9-2005 under section 500 r/w. 34, I.P.C. and which process has been quashed and set aside by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, in revision, filed by the said accused, by Order dated 12-4-2006.

3. The parties hereto shall be referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the said complaint.

4. Heard the learned Counsel on behalf of both the parties.

5. The complainant claims to be a Public Charitable Trust having its Office at Sukhsagar, Ponda, Goa, and that it is established to educate people about the science of spirituality by organizing discourses, seminars, workshops, etc. The complainant claims that its seekers have faith in it and it has earned a high reputation in the society in general and in thousands of seekers in particular. The complainant claims that on 15-5-2004, the respondent/AI Smt. Vimal Dessai filed a false report with Panaji Police Station against Shri. Reshak Gaokar, Shri. Dinesh Naik and Shri. Rajesh Gaokar, seekers, following their spiritual practice under the guidance of the complainant and thereafter in furtherance of their common intention to defame the complainant, the said respondent/A/Vimal Desai and the respondent/A2/Dr. Ashutosh Dessai telephoned many seekers who are carrying on their spiritual practice under its guidance and communicated to them the defamatory statements pertaining to it and its founder Param Pujya Dr. Jayant Balaji Athavale. As per the complainant, false and defamatory statements were made by respondent/AI and respondent/A2 as follows:

On 15-2-2004, accused No.1 telephoned Mr. Hemant Kale of Madkai, Goa and inter alia, told him that "Saunsthane Gund posle ahahe sodle na gund". On 18-5-2004, Accused No.1 telephoned Dr. Manoj Solanki of Madgao, Goa and inter alia told him that "P.P. Dr. Athavale has started sending sadhaks as goondas. In Ponda Ashram scandals are going on, women and ladies folk should not go to Ponda Ashram. Do not take your wife to Ponda Ashram". On 18-5-2004, accused No.1 telephoned Smt. Suma Puthlat of Kochi, Kerala and told her "your sadhaks are behaving like goondas. There are so many young ladies staying in your Ashram. Do you know where there is bua (fake spiritualists). There are bais (women) Kundatai is in Bombay and he is enjoying here". On 195-2004, accused No.2 telephoned Bapu Raokar of Raigad of Maharashtra and while talking to him told him that "Sanathanmode gund girich vadli ahai".

6. As far as the respondent/ A3 Deepti Sarvottam Kamat is concerned, the complainant stated that she had aided and abetted the offence of defamation committed by Al and A2 against the complainant.

7. The complainant on or about 15-7-2004 addressed a common notice to all the three accused alleging what has been stated herein above and claiming damages. Each of the accused replied separately denying the allegations made by the complainant.

8. Thereafter, the complaint came to be filed and statement on oath of the complainant recorded. On the basis of the complaint and the statement on oath of the complainant, the learned C.J.M. was pleased to issue process against the accused by Order dated 9-9-2005 which came to be set aside in revision, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panaji.

9. The complainant has challenged the said Order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in these petitions. There is no dispute that the complaint was filed by the complainant, a Public Charitable Trust, through its Managing Trustee Shri. Virendra Marathe and only hi