Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: function of functionary in V.Mullaivendhan vs The District Public Prosecutor on 25 March, 2022Matching Fragments
6. It is contented by the counsel for the petitioner that to constitute an offence under Section 500 IPC against the Constitutional functionaries or the Minister or Chief Minister of State, it has to be established by the prosecution that the alleged imputation made is in respect of the conduct of the public servant/ public functionary in discharge of his/her public functions and the public functions stand on a different footing than the private activities of a public servant. If the statement made appears to be the criticism with regard to the political activities of a person in personal capacity, the right is guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and further the complaint can be filed only in the personal capacity before the Court of Magistrate and state machinery cannot be used to initiate proceedings.
11. As stated above, to take cognizance of the complaint under Section 199(4)(a) of Cr.P.C, the so called defamation should be directly attributed to a person in discharge of his/her public functions and only in such circumstances, Section 199(4)(a) of Cr.P.C will stand attracted. If the said imputation apparently made against the public functionaries, has no nexus with the discharge of public duties, the remedy available under Section 199(6) of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cr.P.C is only to make private complaint before the regular Magistrate and the remedy under Section 199(2) and 199(4) will not be available. Otherwise, if any criticism or defamation in the nature of personal capacity and such defamation have no nexus with the discharge of official function of public functionaries of the state, complaint cannot be made by the Public Prosecutor merely on the basis of Government Order.