Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Sri Naresh Mishra Local Correspondent ... on 11 May, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:32593 Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 52 of 2013 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Sri Naresh Mishra Local Correspondent Daily Hindi New Pape Counsel for Applicant :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard Shri Brijendra Singh, learned AGA for the State, learned counsel for the accused-respondent and perused the record.
The public prosecutor instituted a criminal case against the accused respondent under Sections 500, 501 IPC with an averment that Sri Zafrul Hasan Khan was posted as District Magistrate, Raebareily Sitapur and his character was unblemished. The accused respondent was a local correspondent of daily Hindi newspaper Swatantra Bharat and he had published several false and fabricated news against Sri Zafrul Hasan Khan as he wanted to earn illegal money out of pressure created by news item against the District Magistrate. Certain news items have been referred in the complaint and the complainant tried to make out the case that the accused respondent was liable to publish false and image tarnishing news therefore, he was liable to be prosecuted.
The State had accorded approval libel suit against the accused respondent and thereafter the case was filed by the public prosecutor. The Court took cognizance and the accused respondent was summoned under Sections 500, 501 IPC. The complainant, Shri Om Prakash Tiwari, Advocate, the then District Government Counsel (DGC) was examined as PW-1. Shri Buniyad Hussain Ansari- PW2 were examined. The charges were framed against the accused respondent under Sections 500 and 501 IPC who had pleaded not guilty and requested for trial.
After framing charge, Shri Om Prakash Tiwari PW-1 and Sri Buniyad Hussain Ansari PW-2 were again called under Section 246 Cr.P.C. to lead their evidence. Thereafter, Shri B.N. Srivastava, Chief Forest Conservator (Finance & Accounts) and Retd. Dr. Ashok Kumar were also examined before the Court as PW-3 and PW-4. All the prosecution witnesses PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4 have supported the prosecution version as stated in the complaint. The accused respondent was confronted under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he denied the charges and stated that he was Correspondent of Swatantra Bharat daily Hindi newspaper and he deposed that he was simply a District Representative. The case was tried and the court below acquitted the accused respondent. Hence, leave to appeal along with memo of appeal has been filed by the State.
After going through the record, it has come that PW1 deposed in the cross examination that he was posted as District Government Counsel in the office when Shri Zafrul Hasan was posted as District Magistrate. He could not depose the date of posting and retirement. He also deposed that he had no knowledge whether the accused respondent was working as Correspondent of hindi daily newspaper Swatantra Bharat or not. He also pointed out that accused respondent was not known to him. He was unable to tell about the posting of the accused respondent as Correspondent in the newspaper. He further deposed that on the instructions of District Magistrate, he instituted the case against the accused respondent but admitted that he had no personal information regarding the facts of the case.
The prosecution could not produced any material of published item of Swatantra Bharat from 26.09.1997 to 01.10.1997. The original copies were not filed but photostat copies of certain cuttings were filed. The prosecution tried to establish that the cuttings of the papers are from the concerned newspapers but the original newspapers were not filed.
All the four witnesses could not depose before this Court that they had read the news item and had personal knowledge to the fact of the case. The prosecution could not produce any material to establish that accused respondent had published the news item. Though it is mentioned that the accused respondent was Correspondent of the said newspaper but no proof was given to the effect that he was employed as correspondent.
PW1 could not depose before the Court in cross examination that accused respondent was employed in Swatantra Bharat and he also admitted that he had no information regarding posting of accused respondent. Similarly, PW2 Buniyad Hussain Ansari also could not identify the accused respondent as in what capacity the accused respondent was employed. He also deposed that he was unable to state that illegal items were published by accused respondent.
After going through all the records, the trial court acquitted the accused respondent by giving cogent reasons which do not require any interference by this Court. Therefore, leave to appeal is rejected.
Appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.5.2023 Pks