Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) IN this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with C.P. Case No. 1404 of 2000 including the order dated 27.4.2001, passed by Shri P.N. Upadhyay, learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder, cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under sections 419, 500, 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code. A complaint was lodged by the opposite party no. 2, in which it was stated that the complainant is the Editor cum Director of Chhotanagpur Times Production and is in the business of Journalism for the last six years. The complainant also claimed to be the publisher of Chhotanagpur Times and its weekly T.V. News. It has been alleged that on 4.12.2000 and 5.12.2000, the complainant could come to know about the publication of a news item in local newspaper "Bihar Observer", in which certain defamatory language and words were used, which lowered down the reputation of the complainant. It has been further alleged that the complainant along with his office staffs informed the accused persons with respect to the said news item published in the news paper by a letter dated 4.12.2000 but the same was not printed and published by the accused persons.
(3.) AFTER conducting an inquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C., cognizance was taken for the offence punishable under sections 419, 500, 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad vide order dated 27.04.2001. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is the Managing Editor of newspaper "Bihar Observer" , petitioner no. 2 is the owner of D.B. Publications Pvt Ltd. and petitioner no. 3 is the editor of the said news paper. He has further submitted that the article, which was published by the newspaper , cannot be by any stretch of imagination said to be defamatory and moreover the said news item was basically a memorandum submitted to the Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad by local news editor of "Eye View" and as such the same was not an independent news item, for which the petitioners could be held liable. He has also submitted that the publication of the said news, which was in the form of a memorandum comes within 9th and 10th exception of section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. Alternatively, it has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that even if the allegations are taken to be true in its entirety in view of section 7 of Press and Registration of Books Act, 1897, the petitioner no. 1 being the Managing Editor and petitioner no. 2 being the owner of D.B. Publications (Pvt) Ltd. cannot be held responsible as filtration of the news items, which are to be published in the newspaper, are the responsibility of the editor.;