- (1.)The instant application, under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Code'), has been filed seeking setting aside /quashing of the order dated 07.07.2008 whereby the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad took cognizance on the complaint preferred by the opposite party No.2, which is registered as Complaint Case No. 6177 of 2008. The applicants have also sought quashing of the order dated 14.12.2011 by which the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I.), Ghaziabad summoned the applicants under Section 500 I.P.C. in connection with the said complaint.
(2.)The relevant facts of the case are that the opposite party No.2 (Dr. Ajay Agarwal - the complainant), claiming himself to be a registered medical practitioner, filed a complaint alleging therein that between 29th July, 2006 to 3rd August, 2006 a manipulated video clip was shown by IBN-7 (T.V. Channel) suggesting a sting operation revealing involvement of the complainant in amputating persons to make them beggars. According to the complainant, the video clip was doctored, contained false allegations and it lowered his reputation in the society. The complainant alleged that consequent to the telecast, various inquiries were set up at various levels. The Ethics Committee, set up by the U.P. Medical Council, which inquired into the matter reported that there was no material to substantiate the allegations of any unethical conduct on the part of the complainant and, subsequently, the Medical Council of India also, on the basis of reports obtained by it, came to the same conclusion. The complainant further alleged that the High Court had entertained a petition, bearing Writ Petition No. 74150 of 2005, on allegations made in the T.V. programme, in which notices were issued to the complainant and after a response from the complainant, upon being satisfied with regards to the falsity of the allegations made against the complainant, the notices were discharged and the writ petition was disposed of. The complainant alleged that he had filed a complaint before the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting against the channel for violation of the "programme code", as visualized under Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks, Act, 1995, on which an enquiry was held and, as a result of which, the Ministry directed the concerned T.V. Channel to broadcast an apology for showing false and defamatory material. It was alleged in paragraph 16 of the complaint that the doctored C.D., which was broadcast by the T.V. Channel, was prepared by one Jamshed Khan, Chief Investigator (DIG) and was let to be aired by accused no.1 knowing that the allegations were false. It was alleged that the report of the programme was also widely published in newspapers thereby severely damaging complainant's reputation in the society. In paragraph 19 of the complaint it was stated that the accused are officers/ employees in the said T.V. Channel, holding various posts, and that they are all supposed to permit transmission of a programme only when they satisfy themselves with regards to correctness of its content. It has also been alleged therein that the accused have failed to discharge their responsibility. With the aforesaid allegations, the complaint was filed for drawing proceeding against the accused under Section 500 IPC. The persons arrayed as accused in the complaint, were the applicant No.1-Rajdeep Sardesai, shown as Editor-in-Chief of CNN-IBN; the applicant No.2 - Ashutosh shown as Managing Editor - IBN-7 and Managing Director-Channel-18; the applicant No.3- Raghav Bahl shown as Director, CNN-IBN; Jamshed Khan (a non-applicant) shown as Chief Investigator (DIG); the applicant No.4 - Arunodey Mukherji shown as an employee of CNN-IBN; Neeti Tandon (a non-applicant) shown as an employee of CNN-IBN; the applicant No.5 - Sanjay Ray Chaudhuri - shown as Executive Director, Channel-18, T.V. 18 India Ltd.; the applicant No.6 - Harsh Chawla shown as an employee of T.V. 18 India Ltd.; and the applicant No.7 - Sameer Manchanda shown as Managing Director of Global Broadcasting News - GBN Indian Television Dot Com Pvt. Ltd. Along with the complaint, several documents were enclosed disclosing that a programme by the title of "Shaitan Doctor" was shown in T.V. Channel IBN-7 making allegations that the doctors including the complainant were involved in amputating persons for making them beggars. Documents also disclosed that inquiries at various levels were held in which it was found that the information aired/ published including the sting operation was not substantiated by evidence.
(3.)A perusal of the order sheet, which is on record as Annexure 1 to the application, reveals that the aforesaid complaint was filed on 07.07.2008 and on that very day the statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Further, as the complainant stated that he was not willing to examine any other witness, a date was fixed for hearing on the question of summoning the accused. Thereafter, on 01.08.2008, the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad summoned the accused under Section 500 I.P.C. Against the summoning order dated 01.08.2008, the accused preferred revision No. 341 of 2009 in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.11, Ghaziabad, which was allowed by order dated 28.01.2011 whereby the summoning order dated 01.08.2008 was set aside on ground that the learned Magistrate while passing the summoning order had placed reliance on copy of various documents, which were not admissible and therefore the matter required reconsideration by the Court of Magistrate for passing a fresh order after taking into consideration the original of the documents. Pursuant to the order of remand, the learned Magistrate took the original of the documents into consideration and passed a fresh summoning order dated 14.12.2011, which has been impugned in the present application.