The Chief Judicial Magistrate Dibrugarh

IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ::: DIBRUGARH

Case No.355C/05

Sri Sarat Ch. Neog : complainant -vs- 1. Dr.Siddhi Prasad Deori 2. Smti.Mitali Konwar 3. Sri Jyotirmoy Hazarika ...... Accused

P R E S E N T Smti.Rita Kar C.J.M.Dibrugarh

Dates of evidence :- 07-09-06, 23-08-07, 11-09-07, & 06-01-09

Date of Argument :- 21-12-12 & 08-01-13

Date of Judgment :- 02-02-2013

Appearance :

For the complainant :- Sri J. Bordoloi, Advocate For accused persons :- Sri S. Shome, Advocate

J U D G M E N T

This case is instituted upon a complaint lodged by complainant Sri Sarat Ch. Neog.

Complainant’s case in brief is that,he is a reputed person holding high and outstanding dignity reputation and prestige in the society being a journalist of Daily Assamese News paper “Aji” published in local language of Assam from and at Guwahati. On 2-12-05 he came to know that a defamatory statement amounting to a news against him has been published by accused persons in the Daily News paper “ Dainik Bhumi putra “ published in the state language from and at Seujpur, Dibrugarh.Again on 3-12-05 accused persons published some defamatory statements,exaggerating the same what published on 2-12-05 in their News paper the “Dainik Bhumi putra” The complainant when went through the alleged news paper “ Dainik Bhumi putra” dated -2- 2-12-05 and 3-12-05 found that there were various defamatory and words/statements with false and baseless concocted story by accused persons only to malign the character as well as personality etc. of the complainant some of which published in the said news paper which has defamed the complainant in the society. Hence the case. The complainant was examined u/s 200 Cr.P.C.and one witness was examined u/s 202 Cr.P.C and finding prima-facie case cognizance has been taken u/s 500/501/502 IPC After appearance particulars of offence u/s 500/501/502 IPC was explained to accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Prosecution has examined three witness.

Statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C obtained.

Defence case : Defence has adopted plea of denial and examined none.

POINTS FOR DETERMINATION

1. Whether accused persons published news item in their News paper “ Dainik Bhumi putra” dated 2-12-05 and 3-12-05 against complainant Sri Sarat Chandra Neog with intent to harm the reputation of the complainant and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 500 IPC ?

2 Whether accused persons printed news item against the complainant in their Daily News paper “ Dainik Bhumi putra” dated 2-12-05 and 3- 12-05 having reason to believe that such matter is defamatory and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 501 IPC ?

3 Whether accused persons sold their news paper “Dainik Bhumi putra” dated 2-12-05 and 3-12-05 containing defamatory matter against complainant Sri Sarat Ch.Neog and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 502 IPC ? -3-

DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE,DECISION AND REASONS THEREOF

Before entering into the matter of appreciation of evidence the essential ingredients of section 499 IPC is laid down below :-

1) making or publishing any imputation concerning any person 2) such imputation must have been made by words either spoken or intended to be read or by signs or by visible representation. 3) such imputation must have been made with intention to harm or with knowledge or having reason to believe that it will harm the reputation of the person concerned. In the instant case the complainant has alleged in his complaint as well as in his evidence that accused persons have published defamatory statements including imputation of characters of the complainant and such imputation has lowered his image in the eye of public in general and in the society.

Now the complainant ( PW 1) Sri Sarat Ch. Neog in his cross- examination has stated that in the year 1997 he worked as a Grade-III employee in the Moran Revenue Circle Office. He has admitted that he has been dismissed from the service by the Deputy Commissioner Sri M.S. Rao, IAS,for publishing false news by violating Assam Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1965,Rule 7 & 16. He has also admitted that he has been arrested in connection with Borbaruah P.S. Case No. 73/04 u/s 341/441/351/294 IPC He has further admitted that regarding that matter news was published in the News Paper “ Agradoot” and “Dainik Janambhumi” dated 14-8-04 and 19-08- 04. He has also admitted that concerning that case Dibrugarh Press Club has terminated him. He has also stated that concerning the news item reported by him ( PW 1) in the Asomiya paper “ Pratidin” dated 29-6-2000 protest was published in the news paper “ Amar Agniban”. He has also admitted that in the paper “ Jana sadharan” one news item was published against him. -4- Learned defence counsel has contended that neither they have published news in their news paper against the complainant with intent to harm his reputation nor publishing of said news in their news paper has caused harm to the reputation of the complainant because the reputation of the complainant as News Reporter was already at a low ebb due to his certain activities. Learned defence counsel has further contended that in order to establish the case of defamation it must be shown that harm has been caused to a person reputation in the estimation of others. He has submitted that in the instant case the complainant thinks that his reputation has been lowered but from the evidence it is evident that he has no reputation at all.

Learned defence counsel in support of his contention has placed reliance upon citation reported in AIR 1952 Orissa 351 ( Sarat Ch.Das and another v- The state) and AIR (37) 1950 Allahabad 455 ( Munnalal v- D.P.Singh).

Ld.defence counsel has also contended that they in good faith and for public good has published the news. In support of this contention Ld.counsel placed reliance in citations reported in AIR 1966 SC 97 ( Harbhajan Singh-v- State of Punjab), 1995 Crl.L.J. 997 ( Pratibha -v- State of Maharashtra). Ld defence counsel also referred the citation reported in 1984 Crl.L.J.1790 ( Narrotam das -v- Magan bhai)

I have gone through this citations. Now as per Explanation 4 to sec.499 IPC “ No imputation is said to harm a person’s reputation unless that imputation directly or indirectly in the estimation of others lowers the moral or intellectual characters of that person in respect of his caste or calling...... ”

In the instant case the complainant (PW 1) in his complaint as well as in his evidence has stated that the news published in the news paper of accused persons have lowered his image in the eye of the public in general and in the society. -5-

PW 2 Sanjib Konwar simply stated that the news published in “ Dainik Bhumi putra” dated 2nd and 3rd December,2005 describing Sarat Ch.Neog as ‘Dhurandhar’, Dalal’ “ Dui number Sambadik” is not correct.

PW 3 Utpal Neog is the younger brother of the complainant. He has stated that in the news paper “ Dainik Bhumi putra” dated 2nd and 3rd December,2005 the complainant was described as “ Dhurandar” “ Halodia Sambadikatar Mukut bihin Samrat “ “ Dalal” etc.for which the complainant was defamed in the society.

Now from the admitted statement of the complainant,PW 1, as it came out in course of his cross-examination it is established that he was dismissed from service by the Deputy Commissioner for publishing false news. It is also established that Dibrugarh Press Club has terminated him. The complainant has adduced evidence of one Sanjib Konwar ( PW 2 ) who is personally known to him and also adduced evidence of his younger brother Utpal Neog ( PW 3). Apart from these two persons none from the fratenity of journalism came forward to depose in his favour to show that as a Journalist he has good reputation in the society. Journalist has pious duty towards the society. From the evidence it is established that his image as a Journalist was already tarnished due to his certain activities and his overall image in the society was already at a low ebb. In the instant case accused persons have succeeded to rebut the complainant’s case that the alleged imputation has caused harm to his reputationn by showing that the complainant’s reputation in view of certain activities was already at a low ebb and the complaint was not bonafide placing reliance on the citation reported in AIR ( 37) 1950 Allahabad 455 ( Munnalal -v- D.P.Singh) I hold that Explanation 4 to sec.499 IPC is attracted in this case and as such accused persons are found not guilty of committing offence u/s 500 IPC. -6-

Now let us decide point No.2

While deciding Point No.1 it is established from evidence that the reputation of the complainant as a Journalist was already at a low ebb. It is also evident from cross-examination of the complainant ( PW 1 ) that matter of his arrest was published in news paper “Agradoot “ and “ Dainik Janambhumi “. As such considering the evidence on record I have arrived at the conclusion that accused persons had reason to believe that imputation made against the complainant whose reputation as Journalist was already tarnished will not cause any further harm to his reputation and in view of this I hold that guilt of accused persons u/s 501 IPC is not established.

Now let us decide Point No.3

While deciding point No.1 it is held that accused persons are not guilty of committing offence of defamation punishable u/s 500 IPC. From the evidence it is established that accused persons did not publish the news item in respect of the complainant in their news paper with intent to cause harm to his reputation as because accused persons had good reason to believe that reputation of the complainant in the society was already at a low ebb and in view of this I hold that guilt of accused persons u/s 502 IPC is not established.

FINDING

I have heard submission of both sides and gone through the case record. I have arrived at the finding that guilt of accused Dr.Siddhi Pd.Deori, Smti.Mitali Konwar and Jyotirmoy Hazarika u/s 500/501/502 IPC not established. Accordingly they are acquitted from the said charges and set at liberty. -7- Judgment is delivered on this 2nd day of February,2013 under my hand and seal of the Court .

Chief Judicial Magistrate Dibrugarh Printed by A.K.Chakravarty -8-

APPENDIX

Prosecution witnesses PW 1 :- Sri Sarat Ch.Neog PW 2 :- Sri Sanjib Konwar PW 3 :- Sri Utpal Neog

Prosecution exhibits

Ext.1 :- Press card issued to Sarat Ch.Neog “AJI” ( in Assamese Daily ) Ext.2 :- Copy of News Paper “ Bhumi Putra” Dated 2nd December,2005

Ext.3 :- Copy of News Paper “ Bhumi Putra” Dated 3rd December/2005

Defence witness and Exhibit : NIL

Material Exhibit :- NIL

Chief Judicial Magistrate Dibrugarh