Sri V.A .Pugazhendi vs Sun Tv Limited on 7 March, 2013

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri V.A .Pugazhendi vs Sun Tv Limited on 7 March, 2013

Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala

                           1


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
                    BANGALORE

        DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH 2013

                        BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.BHAKTHAVATSALA

            CRIMINAL PETITION No.2698/2010

BETWEEN :

SRI V.A .PUGAZHENDI
S/O SRI T.VASU
OCC: BUSINESS & SOCIAL WORKER
R/O NO.345, 14TH CROSS, II BLOCK
JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE 560 011                   ...PETITIONER

(By Sri.KRISHNA S DIXIT, ADV.)

AND :

1 SUN TV LIMITED
HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICER AT NO.367/369,
ANNASALAI, TENAMPATAI
CHENNAI-600 018
TAMILNADU,
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
SRI KALANIDHI MARAN.

2 MR KALANIDHI MARAN M
MAJOR
OCC CHAIRMAN OF SUNT V LTD.,
AT NO. 367/369, ANNASALAI
                           2


TENAMPETAI
CHENNAI 600 018
TAMILNADU.

3 MR RAJA
MAJOR
OCC NEW EDITOR
SUN TV LTD., AT NO.367/369,
ANNASALAI, TENAMPETAI
CHENNAI-600 018
TAMILNADU.

4 MR DAYAL
MAJOR
OCC NEW EDITOR
SUN TV LTD., AT NO.367/369,
ANNASALAI, TENAMPETAI
CHENNAI-600 018
TAMILNADU.                            ...RESPONDENTS

(By Sri. B N PRAKASH FOR R1 TO R3 )

      THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET-ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DT.28/9/07 MADE BY
XI ACMM, BANGALORE CITY, IN PCR.NO.73/07 AND
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DT.5/12/09 MADE BY THE P.O.
FTC-IX, BANGALORE CITY, IN CRL.R.P.NO.714/07.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                              3


                          ORDER

The petition is listed for orders for want of correct address and payment of process fee for issuing notice to Respondent No.4.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the merits of the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the Courts below erred in not taking note of the fact that there is a lot of difference between the alleged fraud of Rs.2,00,000/- and two crores and telecast as if fraud of rupees two crores. He submits that a primafacie case for defamation is made out, but the Courts below erred in rejecting the cas e of the complaint.

4. Trial Court as well as the Revisional Court, on perusal of the material and examining the case at length, came to a conclusion that there was no primafacie case made out to take cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC. I see no 4 illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.

5. In the result, Petition fails and the same is hereby rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE bnv*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court