1998 (6) TMI 589

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Asianet Communications Limited which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The allegations in the complaint, a copy of which is Annexure I, are briefly shown below : 3. The complainant is employed as the Regional Superintendent, Narcotic Control Bureau, Trivandrum, He was previously working as Special Branch, Inspector, Trivandrum City. At that time, one Mariyam Rasheeda, a Maladives national was found staying in India even after the date of expiry of her visa and hence, Crime No. 225 of 1996 of Vanchiyoor Police Station was registered against her under the Foreigners Act and Rules. Thereafter Crime No. 246 of 1996 was reigstered by the Vanchiyoor police under Sections 3 and 4 of the Official Secrets Act. Subsequently, a sp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the proceedings as, according to him, cognizance should not have been taken by the Court as the complaint does not disclose an offence and there are legal infirmities in taking cognizance of the same. Arguments were heard and the Court below rejected the plea of the accused to drop the proceedings as per Annexure II order which is also challenged in this application 5. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the Court below should not have taken cognizance of the offence alleged in the complaint as the complainant cannot be said to be aggrieved so as to maintain an action for defamation. 6. It is not stated in the complaint that the publication contains an averment that it is the complainant who assaulted accused 2 to 4 or that it was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut it is an ever changing body. Members of the police force are not static. Police personals retire and new persons are enrolled. The character and composition of the Kerala Police changes every now and then. So, it cannot be said that the Kerala Police is a definite and determinable body. To come to such a conclusion, the decisions reported in Narayana Pillai v. Chacko, 1986 KLT 1005 : (1986 Cri LJ 2002) and Karunakaran v. Jayasooryan 1992 (2) KLT 33 : (1992 Cri LJ 3540) have come to my aid. In the decision reported in Narayana Pillai v. Chacko 1986 KLR 1005 : (1986 Cri LJ 2002) this Court considered whether publication of imputation made against the Syrian Christian community will affect a member of the community. This Court held that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ain even 1 % of truth which was later entrusted to a journalist", will not be per se defamatory at all. It is not the case of the complainant that the policeman referred to therein is himself. It might be any member of the police force. Hence, it cannot be said that the petitioner can maintain an action for defamation. It is not known under what context the words "in order to prevent any mark on the hip, a wooden plank was kept and assaulted by beating thereon" has been made by accused 2 to 4. It is also not known whether the words refer to the police at all. At any rate, there is no reference in the complaint as to the person who inflicted injury on the accused. It is a matter for guess. The material broadcasted has not been produced in it....