SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Ker) 171

Judges : K.SUKUMARAN
K.M.Mathew And Others - Appellant
Versus
T.V.Balan - Respondent
Case No : Criminal M.C. No. 633 of 1982
Decided On : 07/20/1984
Advocates Appeared :
For the Petitioner: K. P. Dandapani and Sumathy Dandapani, Advocates. For the Respondent: M. K. Damodaran and P. V. Mohanan, Advocates.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for an identifiable and determinate group of persons to establish a complaint of defamation under S. 500, Penal Code, while also emphasizing the importance of freedom of expression and the responsibility of the press.

Headnote:

Defamation - College Teachers - S. 500, Penal Code - Summary of Acts and Sections

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a complaint filed by the General Secretary of the Association of Kerala Government College Teachers against a newspaper for publishing a report that defamed the organization and its members. The accused sought to quash the complaint through a criminal miscellaneous case.

Finding of the Court:

The court analyzed the offending report and concluded that it did not postulate an identifiable and determinate group of persons, making the complaint incompetent and the trial without jurisdiction. The court quashed the complaint, emphasizing the importance of freedom of expression while also considering an individual's reputation.

Issues: The main issue was whether the complaint of defamation against the newspaper should be quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of defamation and emphasized the need for an identifiable and determinate group of persons to establish a complaint under S. 500, Penal Code. It also highlighted the importance of freedom of expression and the responsibility of the press.

Final Decision: The court quashed the complaint, considering the report's lack of specificity in defaming an identifiable group of persons and emphasizing the importance of freedom of expression balanced with individual reputation.

Judgment :-

In February, 1981 there was a strike of the College Teachers. Later, it was withdrawn. It appears that the Government had interdicted payment of salary for the strike period to those who had participated in the strike.

2. On 10-6-1981, the Calicut edition of 'Malayala Manorama' published a news item, emanating from its Trivendrum reporter, captioned : "They pocketed the salary withheld by the Government." The report was indubitably not complimentary to those connected with the strike. It was clearly stated in the report that most of the Government College Teachers abused their position as 'drawing officers' and thus received the salary and allowances which had been withheld by the Government. The Association of Government College Teachers through its General Secretary contradicted the report. He asserted that neither the office bearers nor the active workers of the organisation had received salary in the manner suggested. This report was published in the same paper on 14th June, 1981.

3. The dent in the report caused to the reputation of the organisation and its office bearers was seriously viewed by them. The publication of the clarificatory statement of the Association in the paper did not satisfy the General Secretary of the organisation. He therefore filed on 7-11-1981 a complaint, C.C. 228 of 1981 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate No. 1. Tellicherry. The complainant was described as "T. V. Balan, General Secretary, Association of Kerala Government College Teachers." The Chief Editor, Editor, Staff Reporter and Printer of the paper were arrayed as the accused. The complaint was presented under S. 200, Cri.P.C. It averred that the accused had committed offence punishable under S. 500, Penal Code, and prayed that summons be issued to the accused and that the accused be dealt with according to law.

4. On service of summons, the accused appeared before the Magistrate Court. They were released on bail. Ultimately the case stood posted to 14-10-1982 for evidence.

5. Facing a criminal trial is not a pleasant pastime. In rare cases, when factual situation and legal position are so clear, relief from an unwarranted harassment arising out of a criminal trial can be granted by the High Court. The accused felt that the present case was one such.

6. Three of the accused, accused 1, 3 and 4, filed the above criminal miscellaneous case on 11-10-1982, invoking the power of this Court under S. 482 Cr.P.C. and praying that the complaint and proceedings pursuant thereto be quashed.

7. The petition was entertained by this Court on 12-10-1982. Further proceedings were stayed. The respondent-complainant who entered appearance in the case in due course, strongly opposed the petition. It was contended on his behalf that the case is not one where the accused should be permitted to have an easy escape through a side walk as it were. The case is one where the accused had to face the trial, according to him.

8. The offending report was read over and over again by counsel appearing on both sides. On behalf of the respondent, particular stress was made on portions which had been specifically referred to in the complaint, the excerpts of which had been extracted therein. The report, according to the complainant, did make out a case which should go to the trial.

9. The serious and difficult question is whether the case should necessarily go to the trial.

10. It is desirable that at outset reference is made to the passages in the report complained of as offending the accused. They are : (1) The title of the report already referred to above. (2) A sentence which reads : "And some leaders of the Government College Teachers Organisations who had staged the strike had not hesitated to receive the undeserved salary and allowances." and (3) A statement reading : "Emoluments went down the drain as regards those teachers in private colleges and the junior lecturers in the Government College themselves, who had entered the strike trusting the l


























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top