Gujarat High Court
Judgename :M.U.SHAH
GULABCHAND BHUDARBHAI SONI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION 200 of 1967
Decided On : 07/10/1969
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 499 and 500 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 - Section 107 – Conviction - Reputation harm - Complainant opponents case is that the accused who is the applicant herein was staying as a tenant in his house - Order of conviction and sentence has been upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal - Revision application is directed against the said order dismissing the appeal of the accused – Held, Accused having been convicted of defamation it was held that the accused was protected by Exception 9 in as much as the statement was made apparently for the protection of his own interests and when his application was under investigation by the police and that the statement was made by him in good faith - Court think that the fact that the statement otherwise defamatory was made in good faith is corroborated by the fact that the complainant in the present case had been convicted and fined for insult to the accused - Court also think accused remark about him was made in the protection of his own interests - Decision has no applicability in the instant case - It is true that public policy requires that a party preferring a legal proceeding shall do so with his mind uninfluenced by the fear of an action for defamation or a prosecution for a libel - But the privilege is a qualified one and not absolute - A person who deliberately makes defamatory statements without justification is not protected - For the aforesaid reasons the contentions raised have no merit and are rejected – Ordered accordingly
( 1 ) THIS revision application arises out of a complaint for the offence punishable under sec. 500 Indian Penal Code which was filed by the opponent No. 2 herein named Prabhudas Bhogilal Dudhwala in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class 7 Court Baroda which was registered as Criminal Case No. 77 of 1966. The complainant opponents case is that the accused who is the applicant herein was staying as a tenant in his house. The accused had on September 10 1965 made an application against the complainant before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under sec. 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (V) of 1898 for taking out chapter proceedings against him. The case was registered as Chapter Case No. 632 of 1965. In that application made in Gujarati several wild and reckless defamatory imputations were made against the complainant with the intention to harm the reputation of the complainant. It stated inter alia that the present complainant Prabhudas Bhogilal who was the landlord of the premises which the present accused Gulabchand was occupying as a tenant with a view to obtain possession of the said premises in order to realise higher rent was making frantic intriguesagainst him. The application further stated that on the night of June 10 1965 while the applicant therein (present accused) was sitting in his house and mending mangoes the opponent therein (present complainant) entered his house and committed criminal trespass; that he gave wild abuses and gave a kick on his back; that he took out a knife from his pocket opened it raised it at him and menacingly demanded of him the withdrawal and settlement of his application (complaint) made against the complainant accusing him of having committed murder of his son or else he would meet the same fate as did the son. After narrating the other facts relating to the incident in the pen-ultimate paragraph of the application it was stated that the opponent was a rich influential frenzied type man and a leader of a gang of miscreants and he (present accused) had apprehension that any time he (present complainant) might cause harm to his person and property. In his examination on-oath recorded below his application Ex. 15 the accused had inter alia stated that the complainant was a dangerous `goonda. These imputations made in the pen-ultimate paragraph of the present accuseds application and in the examination on oath below it are the defamatory imputations of which the present complainant has made grievance in his complaint in Criminal Case No. 77 of 1966 out of which this revision application arises. It may here be stated that the accused had not proceeded with his application Ex. 15 which was dismissed because of default of his appearance on the date of hearing. At the trial the accused had pleaded protection under Exception 8 to sec. 499 I. P. Code. However he had led no evidence whatsoever to show that he had exercised good faith in making these imputations. Both the Courts below have taken the view that the said imputations are defamatory to the complainant and were made with the intention of harming or with the knowledge that they would harm the reputation of the complainant. Both the Courts have also held that the accused did not prove good faith in making the imputations and therefore was not entitled to the protection of Exception 8 to sec. 499 I. P. Code. The learned Judicial Magistrate had convicted the accused for the offence under sec. 500 I. P. Code and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/in default rigorous imprisonment for one month. The order of conviction and sentence has been upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Baroda in Criminal Appeal No. 137 of 1966. The present revision application is directed against the said order dismissing the appeal of the accused.
( 2 ) MR. A. M. Joshi learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant-accused has not contested the finding of the low
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.