A defamation complaint must specify the exact allegedly defamatory words to uphold a conviction under Section 500 IPC, protecting the accused's right to a fair defense.

ORDER

1. This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 29.07.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in case no. Criminal Appeal 39 of 2014 affirming the judgment and order dated 17.05.2014 passed by the learned SDJM, Bishalgarh, Sepahijala in case No. CR 08 of 2009 wherein the petitioner was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 500 IPC with default stipulation and, further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 502(b) IPC with default stipulation.

2. Briefly stated, Sri Gora Chakraborty, being the Secretary of Bishalgarh Sub-Divisional Committee, a whole time activist of Communist Party of India (CPI) has filed a complaint alleging that he has been defamed by the publication of some news item published in Syandan Patrika'.

3. The petitioner is the Publisher, Editor and Printer of the said publication. The complaint petition was filed, and later on, it was taken into record after examination of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The petitioner appeared before the learned SDJM, Bishalgarh after receipt of summon. Charge was framed against the petitioner under Section 500 /501IPC to which the petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In course of trial, the complainant adduced 8 witnesses including himself. The petitioner, being the accused, did not adduce any evidence. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the petitioner was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to which the petitioner pleaded his innocence and denied to adduce any evidence on his behalf.

4. Having heard the learned counsel and on consideration of the evidences and materials brought on record, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner, as aforestated. Being aggrieved, the accused-petitioner preferred an appeal before the court of learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing the parties had affirmed and upheld the judgment and order of conviction and sentence returned by the learned trial court. Hence, the accused-petitioner has challenged the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence by means of filing the present revision petition before this court.

5. Heard Mr. SC Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-complainant. Also heard Mr. S. Debnath, learned Additional PP appearing for the respondent-State.

6. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, primarily urged that there is nothing detail in the averments, either in the complaint or in the sole statement with reference to the imputation which was said to be contained in the article published in Syandan Patrika' dated 22.09.2008 and 02.10.2008, but, both the Courts below have failed to appreciate these primarily ingredients of Section 499 Cr.P.C. while returning the findings of conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel has drawn my attention to paragraph 7 of the complaint filed by the complainant-respondent which is reproduced hereunder, for convenience:

"That, on 22nd September, 2008 a news item had been published in the Syandan Patrica a leading daily newspaper of Tripura against the complainant and Sri Kajal Bhowmik with malicious intention and in that news a totally false and f