Case Note & Summary
The applicants, Sunil and Akash, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against respondent no.1, Pramod, alleging dishonour of a cheque and failure to pay the debt. In response, Pramod filed a private criminal complaint under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, contending that the averments in the Section 138 complaint were libellous and constituted publication of defamatory matter. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, after verification, issued process against the applicants. The applicants filed a criminal revision before the Sessions Court, but it was dismissed. Aggrieved, they approached the High Court by way of the present criminal application. The core legal issue was whether the contents of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be considered defamatory under Section 500 IPC. The applicants argued that the complaint merely recited the existence of a debt and its non-payment, and contained no words casting aspersions on integrity, character or reputation. Respondent no.1 maintained that the very act of filing such a complaint, and the text therein, was defamatory. The High Court examined the text of the Section 138 complaint and found that it only referred to the discovery of debt and failure to pay; there were no imputations harming the reputation of the respondent. The court held that while filing a court case is a publication, for it to attract defamation, the contents must be per se defamatory. The court noted that the revisional court had erred by delving into evidence recorded at the verification stage, whereas the test for defamation required only a plain reading of the allegedly defamatory text. The court observed that the defamation complaint was a clear case of vexatious litigation intended to harass the applicants and that the revisional court had succumbed to pestering arguments. Consequently, the High Court quashed the defamation complaint and set aside the process, holding that no offence under Section 500 IPC was made out. The court also awarded token costs of Rs. 10,000 to the applicants, to be recovered from respondent no.1.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Defamation - Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code - Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Words in the complaint under Section 138 only stated discovery of debt and failure to pay, without any aspersion on integrity, character or reputation - Held that filing of a complaint under Section 138 is a publication, but unless the contents are defamatory, no offence under Section 500 is made out - The process issued was bad in law (Paras 5, 7, 8) B) Criminal Procedure - Issuance of Process - Scope of Enquiry - The court must test defamation by reading the text of the complaint alone, not the evidence recorded at verification - Revisional Court erred by going through evidence and dismissing revision; proper course was to quash process (Paras 10, 12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act constitutes defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, and whether process was rightly issued
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application, quashed the defamation complaint (Criminal Complaint Case No. 649 of 2008), and set aside the process issued. Exemplary costs of Rs. 10,000 were awarded to the petitioners.
Law Points
- Publication by filing court proceedings may be defamatory only if the contents are per se defamatory
- For taking cognizance under Section 500 IPC
- the court must examine whether the words used in the complaint are defamatory
- At the stage of process issuance
- only the text of the allegedly defamatory document is to be considered
- not evidence
