NAKKHEERAN GOPAL Vs. RAJENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition is filed for quashing C.C.No.7 of 2016 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankari. This complaint was filed under Sec. 200 of Criminal Procedure Code for an offence punishable under Sec. 469 and 500 r/w. 501 and 502 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

(2.) Respondent/complainant filed his criminal complaint alleging that he is a party worker in All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kalazham. Respondent was the Youth Wing Deputy Secretary of Salem Rural District of the AIADMK till recently. He was having regular written and oral communication with party headquarters on the activities of the party in his district. Except party headquarters and Honourable Amma, he never exposed his grievance with any person, body corporate, association or anybody on the earth with respect to party matters. The Tamil Magazine "Nakkheeran" in Volume 28, No.86, page 1,2 and 3, 2016 February 07-09 issue, published a false and fake article with respect to the then Honourable Minister Edappadi Palanisamy. He never communicated such allegations against the said Minister. The second petitioner with the connivance of Editor, Printer and Publisher, the first petitioner, forged the complainant's letterhead with a sole intention to defame the complainant and his party, published the article against the will and wish of the complainant and without his knowledge. Petitioners have specific knowledge that the letterhead is forged and used to defame the complainant by means of wrongful gain to the accused and wrongful loss to the respondent/complainant. The imputation will harm the reputation and political life of the respondent/complainant. The respondent/complainant called the second petitioner through his phone on 7/2/2016 at about 14.19 hours and shouted over the forged report and requested him to publish an apology letter immediately. The second petitioner felt sorry and promised to publish an apology report in the forthcoming issue. On 8/2/2016, respondent/complainant issued a notice to the petitioners 1 and 2 calling upon to publish an apology letter within seven days from the date of receipt of notice. But, so far, petitioners have not done so. Again on 19/2/2016 at about 10.01 hours respondent/complainant called the second petitioner over his mobile phone and insisted to publish apology. Second petitioner called him at about 14.08 hours on the same day and promised to publish apology letter in their forthcoming issue. In such circumstances, this case is filed. After recording the statement of the respondent/complainant, learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankari, has taken cognisance of this case under Ss. 469, 500 r/w. 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons to the petitioners. Challenging the said complaint, this quash petition is filed.

(3.) Notice was ordered to the respondent in this quash petition and respondent entered appearance through Advocate Mr.Selvaraju. When the matter was taken up on 10/11/2021, Mr.Selvaraju reported no instruction from the respondent. Fresh notice was ordered to be sent to the respondent. On 23/11/2021, fresh notice was taken to respondent and proof of service was filed. Registry was directed to verify as to whether any vakalath has been filed on behalf of the respondent, otherwise, print the name of the respondent in the cause list. When the matter came on 11/2/2022, there was no representation for the respondent and again adjourned to 15/2/2022. On 15/2/2022, there was no representation for the respondent despite his name was printed in the cause list. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and matter was adjourned to 17/2/2022 for hearing submission of the respondent. On 17/2/2022, there was again no representation for the respondent. Counsel for the petitioners was heard and the matter was posted for orders today.