Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 7432
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
G. GIRISH, J
K.V.PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
SHYJA – Respondent
Crl.MC 6119/2019
T.K.PANKAJASHAN PILLAI, SHIVSHANKAR RAO, SAJI PANKAJAKSHAN, DR.V.N.SANKARJEE, SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN, SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI, SRI.M.M.VINOD, SMT.M.SUSEELA, SMT.ARYA BALACHANDRAN, SRI.SUDHAKARAN V., SMT.KEERTHI B. CHANDRAN, SMT.SEENA C.
Defamation complaints based on statements in civil suit documents are maintainable, as Section 195 Cr.PC does not apply to such cases.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 500 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Defamation - Petition to quash proceedings for defamation based on statements made in a civil suit affidavit - The court held that the complaint is maintainable and not barred under Section 195 Cr.PC, as the provisions do not apply to defamation claims. (Paras 1, 4, 6, 8)
(B) Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that allowing defamation claims arising from civil suit documents is necessary to prevent parties from making inflammatory allegations without consequence. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner faces defamation charges for statements made in an affidavit related to a civil suit, claiming the complaint is not maintainable under Section 195 Cr.PC.
Findings of Court:
The court found no legal basis for the petitioner's claims and upheld the Magistrate's decision to proceed with the defamation complaint.
Issues: The main issues were the maintainability of the defamation complaint under Section 195 Cr.PC and the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court over statements made in civil proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that Section 195 Cr.PC does not bar defamation complaints arising from civil suit documents, emphasizing the need for accountability in civil litigation.
Result: Petition dismissed.
O R D E R
The petitioner, who faces criminal prosecution for the commission of offence of defamation punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘ IPC '), in C.C.No.1192/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Cherthala, has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, ‘Cr.PC’), to quash the proceedings in the said case. The complainant in the said case is the first respondent herein.
2. The alleged defamatory statement was made by the petitioner in an affidavit filed before the Munsiff’s Court, Cherthala, in O.S.No.804/2014 instituted by him against four defendants among whom the complainant in the above defamation case was arraigned as the second defendant. The aforesaid affidavit was filed by the petitioner in support of I.A.No.1731/2016 for the production of a document, and for initiation of prosecution proceedings against the defendants in O.S.No.804/2014 on the files of the Munsiff’s Court, Cherthala, for violation of injunction order. The relevant objectionable portion of the aforesaid affidavit, which is said to be defamatory, is extracted hereunder:
3. The learned Magistrate, after recording the sworn statement of the first respondent and the witnesses, took the complaint to the files and issued summons to the petitioner herein.
4. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that the aforesaid complaint against him is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained under Section 195 Cr.PC. Another contention raised by the petitioner challenging the maintainability of the aforesaid complaint is that the said case is a transgression into the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, and that it is not possible to prefer complaint before the Criminal Court against the statements made by the parties to a civil suit in their pleadings or other documents produced before the Civil Court.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
6. The contention of the petitioner is that, Section 195 Cr.PC proscribes institution of a criminal complaint alleging defamation for the statements made by a party to a civil suit in the affidavit or other pleadings filed before the Civil Court, is having no legal basis. It seems that the petitioner is under a misconception about Section 195 (1)(b)(i) Cr.PC that the term, ‘when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceedings in any court’ in the said Section is applicable to all offences in addition to Sections 193 to 196, 199, 200, 205 to 211 & 228 of the IPC referred thereunder. There is absolutely no need for any elaboration on that aspect since the aforesaid Section itself makes it clear that the bar contained thereunder is applicable only to those offences coming under Sections 193 to 196, 199, 200, 205 to 211 & 228 of the . Therefore, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the above regard is prima facie baseless.
7. As regards the contention that the Criminal Court is forbidden from initiating proceedings in a complaint alleging defamation in connection with the objectionable statements in the affidavit or other applications filed before the Civil Court, there is absolutely no law which the petitioner could bring to the notice of this Court to substantiate the above argument. Such a restriction would in effect result in an anomalous situation wherein the parties to civil cases would dare to raise highly inflammatory and pernicious allegations against their counterparts with impunity in the affidavits, applications and pleadings before the Civil Court.
8. As far as the present case is concerned, the statement in the affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Munsiff’s Court, Cherthala, is capable of giving the imputation that the first respondent is a fraudster involved in cheating financial institutions. The
