Gajendragadkar, C. J. - (1.) By this appeal, which has been brought to this Court by special leave, the appellant Harbhajan Singh challenges the correctness of his conviction for an offence under S. 500 of the Indian Penal Code, and the sentence imposed on him for the said offence. The criminal proceedings against the appellant were started on a complaint filed by Surinder Singh Kairon, son of S. Pratap Singh Kairon, who was at the relevant time the Chief Minister of the State of Punjab. In his complaint, the complainant Surinder Singh alleged that the appellant had published in the Press a statement against him which was highly defamatory of him. The said statement was published in the "Blitz", which is a Weekly Magazine of Bombay, on July 23, 1957 and extracts from it were given publicity in the "Times of India" and certain other papers. According to the complaint, the defamatory statement was absolutely untrue and by publishing it, the appellant had rendered himself liable to be punished under S. 500, I. P. C.
(2.) It appears that on July 22/23, 1957, the Punjab Government issued a Press note in which it was averred that certain Urdu Dailies from Jullundur were indulging in mischief and false propaganda, alleging complicity of a Minister's son in smuggling on the border. The Press note alleged that this was done with a view to malign the Government and to cause suspicion in the mind of public. The Punjab Government categorically denied the said allegation. The Press note added that the papers which were publishing the said false reports should come out openly with the name of the son of the Minister instead of repeatedly publishing things in a vague and indirect manner, and that they should not take shelter behind anonymity and should not be afraid of the consequences of the publication of these allegations. The Press note concluded with the statement that the Punjab Government had already taken steps to curb smuggling and they were determined to put it down with a firm hand.
(3.) It was in response to the challenge thus issued by the Punjab Government in its Press note that the appellant published the impugned statement which reads:- "My attention has been drawn to a Punjab Government Press Note categorically denying the complicity of a Minister's son in smuggling. That Press Note also throws a challenge to some Urdu Dailies "to come out openly with the name of the son of the Minister" and then face the consequences. I don't know whether the newspapers concerned will take up this challenge of the Punjab Government or not, but as one of those who have been naming that son of the Minister as one of the leaders of the smugglers from Public platform, I hereby name that son as S. Surinder Singh Kairon son of S. Pratap Singh Kairon, Chief Minister. And I do so determined to face the consequences of the charge being openly levelled by me. I further allege that the son of our Chief Minister is not only a leader of smugglers but is responsible for a large number of crimes being committed in the Punjab. But because the culprit happens to be Chief Minister's son the cases are always shelved up. If the Punjab Government accepts this challenge, it should do so by appointing an independent committee of impartial judges from outside the Punjab and then let us see who has to face the consequences. If the Punjab Government dare not do so, I would not mind serving a term in jail for having had the courage to come out with the truth. May I bring it to the notice of Punjab Government that Chief Minister's son is being discussed in almost every Punjab house, but people are afraid of talking about him in public lest they be punished for that." It is this statement which has given rise to the present criminal proceedings.;