Case Note & Summary
The applicants, Vijay Darda (Chairman of Lokmat Media Private Limited) and Rajendra Darda (Editor-in-Chief of Lokmat Media), filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenging the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yavatmal, issuing process against them under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for defamation. The non-applicant/complainant, Ravindra Ghisulal Gupta, was aggrieved by a news item published in the daily newspaper 'Lokmat' on 20.05.2016, which he alleged was false and frivolous, published with the intention of humiliating him and lowering his image in society. The complainant lodged a private complaint against the applicants and others, and the Magistrate, after recording verification and examining the material, issued process against them. The applicants directly approached the High Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Prabhu Chawla vs. State of Rajasthan. The court examined the complaint and found that it contained no specific allegations regarding the role of the applicants in the selection or publication of the defamatory news item. The complaint merely stated that the applicants were the Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of the newspaper. The court held that in the absence of specific averments showing their involvement, the process issued against them could not be sustained. The court quashed the order issuing process against the applicants, allowing the application.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Defamation - Vicarious Liability of Newspaper Officials - Section 500 IPC, Section 482 CrPC - Quashing of Process - The court considered whether the Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of a newspaper can be held vicariously liable for defamation without specific allegations of their involvement in the selection or publication of the news item. Held that in the absence of specific averments showing the role of the applicants in the selection or publication of the defamatory article, the process issued against them cannot be sustained. The complaint merely stated that the applicants were Chairman and Editor-in-Chief, which is insufficient to attract criminal liability. (Paras 2-8) B) Criminal Law - Defamation - Liability of Editor - Section 500 IPC - The court examined the liability of an Editor-in-Chief under Section 500 IPC. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Prabhu Chawla vs. State of Rajasthan, the court held that the mere designation as Editor-in-Chief does not automatically make one liable for defamation; there must be specific allegations that the person was responsible for the selection or publication of the defamatory material. (Paras 5-8) C) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - The court held that where the complaint lacks specific allegations against the accused, the continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law, warranting quashing under Section 482 CrPC. (Paras 7-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order issuing process under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code against the Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of a newspaper can be sustained in the absence of specific allegations regarding their role in the selection or publication of the alleged defamatory news item.
Final Decision
The court allowed the criminal application and quashed the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yavatmal, issuing process against the applicants under Section 500 IPC in R.C.C. No. 614 of 2017.
Law Points
- Defamation
- vicarious liability
- criminal defamation
- Section 500 IPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- quashing of process
- newspaper liability
- editor liability
- publisher liability
- specific allegations
