Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

Intent to defame is necessary for charge of defammation

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This Blog
 
This Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, 20 May 2012

Malice an intent to defame is a must for charge of defamation/it are absent/prosecution quashed.

 
Allahabad high court Criminal Revision No.2929 of 2006

Dr. Vishnu Dutt Agarwal .....................Revisionist

Versus

State of U.P. and another ................ Respondents.

Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.

Challenge in this revision by the revisionist Dr. Vishnu Dutt Agarwal is to his summoning order dated 12.4.2006 passed by C.J.M. Muzaffarnagar in Complaint Case No.1778/9/2006, Dr. Karan Pundir Vs. Dr. Vishnu Dutt Agarwal, for offence u/s 500 I.P.C. and entire proceeding of the aforesaid trial.
A brief resume of the unfolded background facts indicate that complainant Dr. Smt. Karan Pundir was a demonstrator (Gynaecology & Obstractics) in Swami Kalyan Dev Rajkiya Aurvedik College, Rampur District Muzaffarnagar, and was also running Aishwarya Nursing Home at her residence in house no.154 Mohalla Brahmpuri, P.S. Civil Lines, Muzaffarnagar. Revisionist accused was the acting principal and superintendent of the said college and hospital and resided in House No.189/27 Mohalla Ompuri, P.S. Kotwali City, District Muzaffarnagar. In her estimation complainant was educated and belonged to a respectable family. Her father Rajpal Singh Pundir is a practising advocate in district court, Muzaffarnagar, whereas her husband Rajesh Kumar Chauhan had superannuated from Supervisor post in Bharat Electronics in 2004. Complainant is an income tax payee and her PAN No. is ADAPP 1909 H. In the estimation of general public, she was a reputed doctor, a gentle human being and a courteous family doctor and was respected as such, her husband was also respected because of her reputation. To defame the complainant and tarnish her family prestige revisionist accused, who harboured animosity against her, had, knowingly, sent frivolous and false complaints against her to the Director, Ayurvedic and Unani Services, Lucknow, U.P., because of which, complainant was physically and economically tormented and her image was tarnished in estimation of general public. All this was done for faux pas and

https://www.lawweb.in/2012/05/malice-intent-to-defame-is-must-for.html


Learning

 0 Replies


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register