Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13. It is submitted that complainant has not placed on record any material to show that R-4 to R9 had defamed the complainant and his family members. Ld. Counsel also drew attention of the court towards penultimate para of the impugned order, which reads as under:

"The court has gone through entire complaint, entire evidence including the video CD and transcript thereof but the complainant has not levelled any specific allegations against any of the accused No.3 to accused No.8. Even in the video CD, except accused No.2, no person has uttered even single word so as to constitute even iota of act towards the alleged defamation against the complainant".

It is submitted that ld. Trial court had gone through the entire evidence, including the video CD and transcript thereof, but could not find any specific allegations against A- 3 to A-8.

14. In the factual matrix noted above and also in view of the fact that after remand of the case on earlier occasion in this case, the revisionist on 21 st February 2015 had made a statement that he had no further evidence available with him or in his control this court is not inclined to accept further request of the Ld counsel appearing for the petitioner to remand the case again to the Ld Magistrate for making further inquiry regarding the fact as to who had briefed the reporter or brought the C.R. No. 56/15 Puneet Mittal vs. State & Ors. 7 Of 10 Unique ID No. 02401R0640142015 reporter to the hospital or where else the reporter was briefed in order to show the conspiracy between R-4 to R-9 and R-2 & R-3.