D.K.SINHA, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashment of entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 276 of 2000 wherein, after finding a prima facie case on enquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the alleged offence under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, processes were directed to be issued against the accused including the petitioner Hari Bansh Narayan Singh, by the order dated 13.6.2001.
(2.) THE complainant - Sheo Prasad Agrawal alleged in the complaint petition against Kameshwar Sharma, Branch Manager of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Shri Haribansh (petitioner herein), Chief Editor, Prabhat Khabar, Ranchi and Harinarayan Singh. The complainant was having Savings Bank Account No. 659 in the Ranchi University Branch of the Oriental Bank of Commerce. On 24.2.2000, he had visited the said Branch of the Bank for verification of his account but since it could not be verified for the alleged non co -operation, he had sent a complaint to the Head Office and since then, the Branch Manager was nursing grudge against him. It was further alleged that a news item was published on 13.4.2000 in the newspaper under the caption. 'NETA SE PARESAN SHAKHA PRABANDHAK NE GUHAR KI' and below that, it was mentioned therein that the complainant had taken loan from different Banks though he denied having obtained any loan amount from the named Banks. He further narrated that the matter in respect of publication of news item was conveyed to him by his friends Arvind Kumar, Shankar Gupta and Mukesh and as such his prestige and position lowered down especially in the eyes of his near and dears. Learned Counsel Mr. Manoj Tandon, at the outset submitted that the petitioner was admittedly the Chief Editor of the daily newspaper 'Prabhat Khabar' published from different places and he was not responsible for selection of the news for its publication in the newspaper under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. The news which was published in the newspaper was based upon the written complaint, addressed to the Officer -in -charge, Kotwali Police Station, Ranchi by the Manager of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Ranchi University Branch, Ranchi and therefore, the petitioner could not be held responsible. An another written complaint was made by one Seema Chaturvedi before the Officer -in -charge of the Sukhdeonagar Police Station, Ranchi by which she alleged against the complainant. Sheo Prasad Agrawal that he was using her name at different places for his personal gains. Mr. Tandon further submitted that the aforesaid news in relation to the complainant -opposite party No. 2 was published with due diligence and care, as such, no case under Section 506 of the Indian Penal code was attracted against the petitioner -Chief Editor who was not responsible for publication of the news items in the newspaper. Every newspaper used to carry written undertaking, owing responsibility by the concerned Authority/Editor under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 in relation to authentication of declaration under Section 6 and Section 7 of the Act. Mr. Tandon clarified that in every issue of 'Prabhat Khabar', there used to be declaration under Section 7 of the Act that the responsibility for the publication of any news item was attached with the 'Resident Editor' whereas the petitioner was the Chief Editor of Prabhat Khabar, not at all responsible for any kind of news items published in the said daily.
(3.) MR . Tandon submitted that Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code dealt with punishment for criminal intimidation, Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.;