The court held that a defamation suit based on a complaint is premature while criminal proceedings are ongoing, emphasizing the need to allow the criminal justice process to unfold.

ORDER :

Being aggrieved by the orders of learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad dated 06.07.2023 in IA.No.3776 of 2022 in OS.No.835 of 2017, where under, the learned Chief Judge dismissed the request of the Revision petitioner in rejection of plaint under Order VII, Rule 11(a) of Civil Procedure Code (for short ‘C.P.C.’) r/w 151 of C.P.C., the petitioner has filed this revision under Article 227 of Constitution of India.

2. The petitioner has filed the above said IA.No.3776 of 2022 under Order VII Rule 11 (a) of C.P.C. with a prayer to reject the plaint as there is no cause of action for filing the suit. The petition is filed stating that the suit filed seeking relief of damages for Rs.100 Crores. The petitioner herein is the President of AIMIM (All India Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen) and Barrister as well, since inception into politics, won as MLA in the year 1994 from Chairman Constituency and continued by winning the same in the year 1994. Thereafter, the petitioner contested the Parliament election from Hyderabad constituency in the year 2004 and won the same. Since 2004 onwards, the petitioner is elected as Member of Parliament from Hyderabad constituency represented the general public and the petitioner raised various important issues for upliftment of weaker sections. On 01.08.2012, the people of Charminar constituency brought to the notice of the petitioner that an advertisement is published in SIASAT Newspaper on 12-04-2012 inviting investors to invest in the business of the respondents. The advertisement was suspicious as it did not contain any specific address, and the respondents are duping people by attracting them with such type of advertisement, on which the petitioner brought the same to the notice of the Additional Director General of Police, Law and Order, by giving a written complaint to investigate into the matter. The respondents were found guilty and the police department booked the case against the respondents vide FIR No.154 of 2012 and after enquiry, a charge sheet was filed on 23-07-2019 and filing of charge sheet clearly states that the respondents have committed the offence and the same is pending before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad. In the circumstances, the petition is filed by the petitioner to reject the plaint as barred by limitation and for the lack of cause of action, and the earlier petition filed to reject the plaint is dismissed stating that the limitation involves mixed question of fact of law. Further, in the changed circumstances, since the investigation is completed, charge sheet is filed against the respondents; there is no cause of action to entertain the suit.

3. Wherein, the respondents filed counter stating that the similar application filed by the petitioner in IA.No.768 of 2018 was dismissed on merits. In spite of the same, the present petition is filed on the allegation of changed circumstances and that the ground raised by the petitioner is not valid and not provided under Order VII Rule 11(a) of C.P.C. As per the affidavit, the petitioner is seeking rejection of plaint on the ground of changed circumstances, therefore, maintainability of the suit is questionable. There is specific allegation about the suffering of damage to the image and reputation by respondent No.1 on account of vilification campaign by the petitioner and his henchmen. The respondents pleaded that filing of FIR is not disputed, mere filing of charge sheet by the respondents and prosecution does not entitle the petitioner to seek rejection of plaint. More so, when the matters are sub-judice, the respondents are contesting the criminal cases filed by the petitioner and the judgments of the criminal courts are not binding on the Civil Court, hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. The trial Court considered the arguments of both parties stating that the accused is deemed to be innocent until proven guilty before the criminal Court and mere filing of charge sheet cannot be taken as