In petitioner’s complaint for defamation against respondent No.2, who happens to be an Assistant Sub Inspector of Delhi Police, he was summoned as an accused vide order 29th September, 2012. The summoning order of 29th September, 2012 was assailed by respondent-accused by way of a criminal revision petition, which stands allowed vide impugned order of 23rd April, 2014.

The challenge to the impugned order by learned counsel for petitioner-complainant is on the ground that a clear cut case of defamation is made out and so no sanction is required for prosecution of respondent-accused. At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioner had relied upon Apex Court decision in Bhushan Kumar & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. (2012) 5 SCC 424 to submit that summoning order needs not to be a reasoned one and on merits, trial court ought to be permitted to proceed with the case as per law. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 supports the impugned order and submits that respondent-accused had simply recorded the statement in a criminal case and so he cannot be hauled up for the offence of defamation and since the alleged offence was committed during the course of his official duties, th