Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amarjit Kaur vs Harjit Kaur on 7 August, 2014
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
CRM-A-414-MA of 2010 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-A-414-MA of 2010
Date of decision:- 07.08.2014.
Amarjit Kaur
......Appellant
Versus
Harjit Kaur
.......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.
****
SABINA, J.
Respondent had faced trial in a complaint filed by the appellant under Sections 499, 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC').
Case of the complainant in brief, was that the behaviour of the respondent was not good towards the appellant and her family members. Respondent was having only two daughters, whereas, the appellant was having one son and one daughter. Due to this reason respondent nursed jealousy against the appellant. Income of the husband of the appellant was more than the income of the husband of the respondent. The respondent used to quarrel with her husband and due to this reason, the appellant, her husband and her other family members had disowned the respondent and her husband and had broken all relations with them. Now with mala fide intention, respondent had levelled defamatory allegations qua the SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.11 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-414-MA of 2010 -2- character of the appellant. In this regard a complaint was moved by the respondent to the police officials alleging that the husband of the respondent was having illicit relations with the appellant for the last 20/22 years and the daughter of the appellant was born out of the said illicit relations.
In support of her case, appellant led her preliminary evidence. Respondent was summoned to face trial qua offence punishable under Section 500 IPC. Appellant led her evidence in support of her case. The trial Court, vide impugned judgment, dismissed the complaint and ordered the acquittal of the respondent. Hence, the present application under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of leave to appeal by the complainant.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been successful in proving her case.
Trial Court while acquitting the respondent of the charge framed against her has held that although, the appellant had made a complaint to DIG Amritsar, however, the same was found false during inquiry. The case was covered under the 8th exception of Section 499 IPC.
Section 499 IPC and 8th exception read as under:-
Defamation:- Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.11 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-414-MA of 2010 -3- concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that person.
X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X Eighth Exception:- Accusation preferred in good faith to authorised person:- It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with respect to the subject-matter of accusation.
Thus, in the present case, respondent had not only levelled allegations against the appellant but had also levelled against her own husband. Apparently, the complaint was moved by the respondent to the DIG, Amritsar in good faith. When the complaint of the respondent was inquired into, the allegations levelled therein were found to be false. However, the said matter had not been published. Rather the respondent had taken recourse to law in good faith. In these circumstances, learned trial Court had rightly ordered the acquittal of the respondent qua the charge framed against her.
Hence, no ground for interference is made out. Dismissed.
(SABINA) JUDGE August 07, 2014.
sandeep sethi SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.11 17:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document