Friday, March 29, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Punjab and Haryana HC says only relatives of a deceased person can sue for defamatory remarks against them

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the person aggrieved by a defamatory statement must have an element of personal interest. He should either be the person defamed or a family member or near relative in case of a deceased person. This observation was made by Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar while hearing a Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashing of Complaint dated April 18, 2018 ‘Sant Kanwar V/s. Raj Kumar Saini’, under Sections 499, 500 and 501 IPC, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rohtak.

The Court observed that only the ‘family members’ or ‘near relatives’ of the deceased person, against whom imputations have been made, can claim to be ‘persons aggrieved’ to file defamation complaint under Section 499 of the IPC.

The Court noted the contention of Vinod Ghai, Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, that Sant Kanwar, the respondent-complainant, had no locus standi to maintain the subject complaint and stayed further proceedings pursuant to the summoning order dated June 13, 2018 passed therein.

A sub-section of Section 199 of the CrPC made it clear that no Court should take cognisance of an offence punishable under provisions of the IPC except upon a complaint made by a person aggrieved by the offence. This provision, therefore, mandates that the complaint be made by a person aggrieved.

Referring to the provisions of Section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court further noted that a defamation complaint can be made by a ‘person aggrieved’. Explanation 1 to Section 499 IPC states that imputing anything to a deceased person would amount to defamation if such imputation would have harmed the reputation of that person had he been living and such imputation is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives, the Court said.

Also ReadCentral Vista: Supreme Court allows foundation stone ceremony, pulls up Centre for going ahead without court ruling

The Court observed that in this case, the complainant does not claim to be a member of the family of late Chaudhary Matu Ram Hooda or his near relative, while quashing the complaint as not maintainable.

spot_img

News Update

Cowed Down, Finally

Maldives’ Maladies

Trump’s Legal Travails

Birthing a Controversy

Young & Wild