CHARANJIT TALWAR, J.

( 1 ) THE applicant herein, Ganesha Nand Chela, was summoned by Mr. S. M. Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, by his order dated May 29, 1976, for an offence under Section 500, Indian Penal Code, on a complaint filed by Swami Divyanand (respondent herein ).

( 2 ) THE complainant s case was that he was a Sanyasi and disciple of Swami Purna Nand Jt Maharaj. His Guru owned an Ashram known as Sri Krishna Ashram in Delhi. and three other Ashrams situate in Haridwar, Ahmedabad etc. According to the complainant, the accused Ganesha Nand had also been a chela (disciple) of his Guru but he had been removed from the chelaship in the year 1974. It was alleged that With a view to grab the property of the Guru, the accused had made take and malicious accusations against the said Guru and his Dharam, and also against one Shrimati Pritma Devi. The gravamen of the allegations are contained in paragraph 4 of the complaint which reads asunder :

"4. That in order to defame the Guru and his Dharam he has done many acts by mouth and in writing and some of them are detailed as under as they are patent falsehood done with malice and makes the Dharam and Guru and his chelas including the complainant a subject of contempt and ridicule amongst the Sanyasis as well as among the right thinking members of the society. (a) He gave a statement through affidavit in Roorkee Court to the effect that Swami Purnanand Ji Maharaj worships we like other Mahatmas although he was himself once a chela of Shri Pumanand Ji. How can a Guru worship his chela ? In the eyes of the sanyasis and the casual public his vistically degrades the Guru and also speaks these words every now and then, and thus condemns and humiliate his own once Guru which is forbidden by Dharama. (b) He imputes immoral character to the complainant s Guru Swami Pumanand Ji by making false accusation of illicit relations with one Shrimati Pritma Devi who is a woman of about 60 years of age and is an old follower of Swami Pumanand Ji and has married sons and is a respectable civilian lady. He repeatedly gives publication to this imputation by words of mouth and has also got obscene photographs prepared of the Guru Ji and Shrimati Pritma Devi and shows them to the public in Delhi as well as to the Sadhus and thus injure the reputation of the Guru. the sect and the Sanyasis including the complainant who are laughed at by the receivers of the imputation. She is a very learned woman and a renowned speaker and has many times delegated Ganeshanand in declamation contest and won many honours and prizes from various organisations. Because of jealously and illwill and malice he makes, propagates this false accusation. He started this imputation after his removal from the chelaship and from the honour of Mahamandleshwar in April, 1974. (c) He also accused the Guru of squandering his property after this lady and also imputes inchastity and immoral character to her and also imputes that the Guru has stopped practising religion and is just a wordly manner having illicit connections with Shmt. Pritma Devi. (d) He got some photographs prepared through one Shri Khosla from Mehta Photographers Saddar Bazar. Delhi, which have no relation to reality or truth but are simply got prepared with a view to defame and spoil the image of the Guru as well as his chelas among it the public and the priests. "

( 3 ) ON the basis of the evidence led by the complainant despondent herein); the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that a prima-facie case had been made out against the petitioner and, as noticed above, summoned him to stand his trial for an offence under Section 500, Indian Penal Code. After appearing, the accused filed an application on July 12, 1978 seeking discharge on the grounds that the complaint was not maintainable as the complainant was not the "person aggrieved" within the ambit of Section 199 of the Cods of " Criminal Procedure and further that the allegations were groundless.

( 4 )

Click Here to Read the rest of this document