Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

PS Etmadpur , Agra appeared before the Sessions Court qua the FIR 338 of 99 and apprised that two persons including one Gokal Chand received injuries. Upon this plaintiff's anticipatory bail application was dismissed on 15.11.1999. It is said that no news item was published on 12.11.1999 , rather the first news item published was on 13.11.1999 qua recommendation of dissolution of Management of Anumpama College and appointment of an Administrator , it is said that this news item was factually correct on the basis of records and information received from concerned office. It is also said that it was published in goodfaith believing it to be true and considering the same to be for public good. Defendants denied that they ever intended to defame the plaintiff and his society. As regards the mention in the news that plaintiff was arrested, it is the case of the defendant that they made further verification and thereafter on 12.1.2000 published a corrigendum to the effect that plaintiff Sh. D.K. Gupta was not arrested and the error in publication was regretted. As per defendants they had no illwill with respect to this error and had no motive to defame the plaintiff in so far as the news items were published in contd/.......

3. Whether the defendants intentionally published the false contd/.......

news of the plaintiffs arrest and the regret/ apology tendered was not a bonafide one and can not be regarded as a mitigating factor? (OPP)

4. Whether this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit since the alleged defamatory imputation was published in a newspaper in Agra? (OPD)

and he was constrained to take admission at a college in Lucknow.

12.To prove his defence, defendant examined DW1 Gajender Singh , the press correspondent with Amar Ujala . He proved his affidavit Ex. DW1/A and he deposed on the lines of defendants WS. He placed on record copies of several news items published by Amar Ujala relating to plaintiff's educational institutions. Ex. DW1/1 is copy of news item dated 2.11.1999 regarding strike by students, teachers and employees of Anumpama College . Ex. DW1/2 is news item dated 26.10.1999 regarding intervention of police in the ongoing strike at Anupama College. Ex. DW1/3 is copy of news item dated 12.12.1999 from which plaintiff has taken cause of action, Ex. DW1/4 is news items qua withdrawn of the recognition by AICTE. Ex. DW1/5 is copy of news items dated 12.1.2000 whereby defendants regretted the mention of arrest of plaintiff in the earlier news item. Ex. DW1/6 is copy of the dismissal order of the plaintiff dated 22/7/99 , Ex. DW1/7 is copy of FIR with PS Vasant Kunj Delhi.

issuing a corrigendum and regret voluntarily in their news item published on 11.1.2000. In this publication Ex. DW1/5 it has been specifically mentioned that the mention of arrest of plaintiff was an inadvertent mistake and that the mistake is regretted.

31.In case titled Shivaji Gowda Vs. T. Narayanan 1968 Crl. LJ 836 it was ruled that :

"it is sufficient if the accused can show that the statements are substantiate to in regard to the material portion of the allegation or insinuation . Therefore, if the news published by the press is substantially correct , the person responsible for reporting or publishing the same can not be held liable for defamation merely because it is not true on some minor matters."