Defamation claims under IPC Section 500 require a formal complaint from the aggrieved party; proceedings may be quashed if not properly established.

ORDER

The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.517/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Taliparamba. The offences alleged against him in the aforesaid case, in which the Final Report has been filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kudiyanmala Police Station, Kannur, are under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 and Section 120 (o) of the Kerala Police Act , 2011.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner made a Facebook post mentioning the son of CW1 as a person having several fathers, and thereby caused denigration.

3. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that none of the offences alleged in the Final Report filed by the Investigating Agency is attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case. It is pointed out that the offence under Section 500 IPC , cannot be taken cognizance of by a court of law, except upon a complaint filed by the aggrieved person, in view of the mandate contained under Section 199 Cr.P.C. As regards the offence under Section 120 (o) of the Kerala Police Act , it is contended that the aforesaid offence is also not attracted in the absence of material to show that there was repeated or undesirable or anonymous call, letter, writing, message, e-mail, etc., causing nuisance to the aggrieved person.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the third respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has handed over to me the print out of the impugned Facebook post, which the petitioner has made, insulting and annoying the son of the defacto complainant. In the aforesaid Facebook post, the petitioner has mentioned the son of the defacto complainant as a person, who opts for different fathers at different times. Obviously, the contents of the above post is highly defamatory and abusive. However, the offence under Section 500 IPC , cannot be taken cognizance of by a court of law in a Police Report, in view of the bar contained under Section 199 Cr.P.C. So also, it appears that the applicability of Section 120 (o) of the Kerala Police Act , is doubtful in the facts and circumstances of this case.

6. In the above circumstances, the prayer of the petitioner to quash the proceedings against him, deserves to be allowed. However, it is highly necessary to meet the ends of justice that the right of the defacto complainant and her son to institute a properly framed complaint against the petitioner, has to be reserved.

In the result, the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.517/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Taliparamba, are hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that if the defacto complainant or her son opts to institute a private complaint, in connection with the offence under Section 500 IPC against the petitioner, the learned Magistrate shall consider the applicability of Section 473 Cr.P.C (Section 519 BNSS), and decide whether the period of pendency of criminal prosecution in this case, is liable to be excluded from the limitation period, and the delay is liable to be condoned (Sd/-)

G.GIRISH JUDGE jm/