RAMOJI RAO CHAIRMAN RAMOJI GROUP OF COMPANIES Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-2006-10-44
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on October 13,2006

CH. RAMOJI RAO, CHAIRMAN, RAMOJI GROUP OF COMPANIES Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

DILIP BABASAHEB LONDHE VS. STATE [LAWS(BOM)-2013-8-54] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the application filed by the appellants in terms of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). The prayer was to quash the proceedings in CC No. 2/2006 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, City Criminal Courts at Hyderabad. The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Special Public Prosecutor filed a complaint under Section 200 read with Section 199 Cr.P.C. stating that with a common intention intending to harm the reputation of the Government, of its administration, of the Chief Minister, several minister and several public servants made a telecast on E TV-2 channel with commentary knowing fully that the same would harm reputation of public functionaries. The voice over the commentary was that of the appellant No.2. Many expressions and words used in commentary are per se defamatory. The appellants filed a petition in terms of Section 482 Cr.P.C. The stand was that the complaint was nothing but gross abuse of process of Court. The respondent opposed the application stating that on the facts alleged no interference in terms of Section 482 Cr.P.C. was called for. With reference to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) the High Court dismissed the application, holding that a prima facie case existed and, therefore, no interference was called for.
(3.)Though many points were urged in support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that actually there was no intention in any manner to harm reputation of the Chief Minister, of the Ministers or the officials and, therefore, continuance of the proceedings would not be in public interest.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.