The need for evidence to prove good faith and the limitations of absolute privilege in criminal defamation cases.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in C.C.No.243 of 2022 on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, Chennai and to quash the same.)

1. This petition has been filed to quash the private complaint initiated for offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this petition is as follows: (i) The respondent/complainant was enrolled as an Advocate on 07.08.2011, and due to her hard work, she got lot of motivation and now she has set up her independent practice. Her mother is also practicing as a Senior Advocate with more than 25 years.

(ii) The petitioner/accused worked as a Law Officer in Bank of India. After his retirement, he enrolled himself as an Advocate. The petitioner/accused has dealt with several lawyers and exactly know how litigation works and he is not naive to the procedures.

(iii) When the matter stood thus, the petitioner/accused sent a SMS to the respondent/complainant on 26.03.2021, stating that she has to appear before the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (hereinafter referred to as "the Bar Council"). Thereafter, the complainant came to know that the accused has initiated false and motivated disciplinary proceedings against the complainant mainly on the ground that the suit filed by the accused in O.S.No.3318 of 2010, through the mother of the complainant was dismissed for default. It is alleged that the above suit was dismissed due to collusion and misconduct of the respondent/complainant. According to the complainant, the allegations in the complaint are motivated, vexatious, malicious and vengeful.

(iv) It is her contention that she never appeared for the petitioner/accused in the suit in O.S.No.3318 of 2010. Knowing very well that the complainant has nothing to do with the case, the accused with vengeful motive, to take revenge against her and to further harass her, has filed the said complaint before the Bar Council with several defamatory statements. Even during the Bar Council proceedings, the accused would demand money for settlement of the proceedings. The accused tried to prolong the disciplinary proceedings and thus spoiled the career of the complainant and because of that, she has to resign from her Government Advocate post. Thereafter, she was discharged from the disciplinary proceedings on merits.

(v) It is the contention of the complainant that malicious statements were made with an intention to tarnish her image and therefore she has lodged a complaint. The same was sought to be quashed mainly on the ground that the accused had entrusted his personal case to Mrs.Kamala Kumari, mother of the complainant, to file a suit for recovery of rental arrears. During the pendency of the said suit, one third party has got impleaded and therefore he has instructed the said Mrs.Kamala Kumari to file a Civil Revision Petition against the impleadment. Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.2790 of 2018, has been filed before this Court through the mother of the complainant and the complainant also used to discuss this case and after obtaining a stay order in the said C.R.P., the same was not brought to the notice of the trial Court and therefore the trial Court dismissed the said suit for default.

(vi) Hence it is the contention of the petitioner/accused that the respondent/complainant and her mother have not taken any steps towards restoring the suit and therefore, he preferred a complaint before the Bar Council. However, the Bar Council discharged the respondent/complainant.

(vii) It is the stated by the petitioner/accused that the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind in taking cognizance and it is his further contention that the proceedings before the Bar Council were instituted as per law with all good faith as a victim and therefore, the said act is protected as per the Exceptions 8 and 9 t