Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Raju Nayak, the Editor of the Marathi daily 'Lokmat', filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the order dated 30th January 2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panaji, Goa, issuing process against him for offences under Sections 499, 500, 501, and 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complaint was filed by respondent no.1, Mr. Nilesh Dabholkar, alleging that an article published in the newspaper on 15th October 2016 was defamatory. The petitioner contended that the order of the Magistrate was a non-reasoned order and displayed total non-application of mind. The learned Advocate for the petitioner argued that the remedy available to the respondent no.1 was to file a police complaint or a private complaint, but the Magistrate mechanically issued process without considering the material on record. The learned Advocate for respondent no.1 and the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the petition. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the order of the Magistrate was indeed a non-reasoned order and did not reflect any application of mind. The court observed that the Magistrate had merely reproduced the complaint and the verification and then issued process without any discussion or reasoning. The court further noted that the liability of the Editor under Section 501 IPC requires specific averments that the Editor was responsible for the selection of the matter. In the absence of such averments, the proceedings against the petitioner were liable to be quashed. The court allowed the petition, quashed the order of the Magistrate, and set aside the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Issuance of Process - Section 204 CrPC - Application of Mind - The order of the Magistrate issuing process must be a reasoned order displaying application of mind to the complaint and the material on record. A non-reasoned order is liable to be set aside. (Paras 4-6) B) Defamation - Editor's Liability - Sections 499, 500, 501, 502 IPC - The liability of the Editor for defamatory content published in a newspaper requires specific averments that the Editor was responsible for selection of the matter. In the absence of such averments, the proceedings against the Editor are liable to be quashed. (Paras 4-6) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent powers of the High Court can be invoked to quash criminal proceedings where the order of the Magistrate suffers from non-application of mind and is a non-reasoned order. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class issuing process against the petitioner (Editor of a newspaper) for offences under Sections 499, 500, 501, 502 IPC was a reasoned order and displayed proper application of mind as required under Section 204 CrPC.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the order dated 30th January 2017 passed by the learned JMFC, Panaji, Goa, and set aside the criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Criminal Case No. 123/2017.
Law Points
- Criminal Procedure Code
- 1973
- Section 204
- Section 482
- Section 190
- Section 200
- Section 202
- Section 203
- Indian Penal Code
- 1860
- Section 499
- Section 500
- Section 501
- Section 502
- Defamation
- Editor's Liability
- Application of Mind
- Non-Reasoned Order
- Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
