1. All the aforesaid criminal petitions are taken up for analogous hearing and disposal, since these cases raise common questions of law based on similar set of facts.

2. The petitioner, by filing aforesaid criminal petitions under "section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has prayed for quashing the impugned criminal proceedings-in (i) Case No.CR.03/2010, pending in the court of learned Chief judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Udaipur, (ii) Case No. C.R. 168 of 2009, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, court No.5, West Tripura, Agartala, and (iii) Case No. CR.01 of 2010, pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bishalgari West Tripura.

3. I have heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The facts, leading to the filing of these criminal petitions, may be stated, in brief, are as follows : -

The petitioner is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of a Bengali newspaper, namely, the 'Syandan Patrika', which is published from Agartala, Tripura. The complainants are the employees of the Rose Valley Chain Marketing System Private Limited, a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at RGM/ 25/3010, Raghunath Pur, VIP Road, Kolkata. The company reportedly has 350 Branch Offices and 13 Regional Offices, in different places throughout India, including its Regional Office at Agartala.

5. The aforenoted complaint cases were filed in different courts below alleging, inter alia, that the accused-petitioner committed offence under sections 500, 501 and 502, IPC, by publishing, in all, five defamatory news items in the Syandan Patrika, published on 25.10.2009, 26.10.2009, 27.10.2009, 29.10.2009 and 31.10,2009, against M/s. Rose Valley Chain Marketing System (P.) Ltd., where the complainants-respondents were employed.

6. On receipt of the aforesaid complaints, learned trial court took cognizance of offences as aforesaid and issued process for appearance of the petitioner. Complaints in CR No. 168 of 2009, CR No.01 of 2010 and CR No.03 of 2010, were also filed in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.5, West Tripura, Agartala, Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bishalgarh, West Tripura, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Udaipur respectively. The complaint cases were filed by the employees of the M/s. Rose Valley Marketing System (P.) Ltd., making similar allegations against the petitioner, for publication of the same five news items as indicated above.

7. Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the criminal proceedings in all the aforesaid cases, i.e., CR. No.03 of 2010, CR No. 168 of 2009 and CR No.Ol of 2010, are incompetent and liable to be quashed, inasmuch as the cases are lot filed by persons aggrieved, in terms of section 199, Cr.PC and further, the complaints were filed with mala fide intention, for causing harassment to the accused-petitioner.

8. Learned senior counsel, appearing for the petitioner further submitted that even the facts stated in the complaints and the initial deposition of the witnesses recorded before issuance of process by the court, are taken to be true in its entirety, no offence whatsoever, is made out against the petitioner.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the provisions of section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, submitted that no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable' under Chapter XXI, IPC, relating to defamation', except upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved. The complainants-respondents, in the instant petitions, are not, apparently, persons aggrieved and they are only employees of the company. The impugned news items allegedly defamed the company and its chairman, therefore, multiple complaints lodged by the complainants-respondents, as employees of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document