Gujarat High Court
Parmar Rameshbhai Kamabhai vs State Of Gujarat on 10 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 17081
of 2023
===============================================================
PARMAR RAMESHBHAI KAMABHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
===============================================================
Appearance:
URVESH M PRAJAPATI(8878) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
===============================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 10/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") seeking leave to file an
appeal against the judgment and order dated 31.05.2023 passed by
the learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana
(hereinafter referred to as the "learned Trial Court") in Criminal
Case No. 8338 of 2017, whereby the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 -
original accused came to be acquitted from the offence under
Section 500 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as
"IPC" for short).
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
1.1 The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are hereinafter referred to
as "the accused" in the rank and file as they stood in the original
case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts culled out from the memo of the present
application as well as the impugned judgment and order and
record and proceedings are as under:
2.1. The complainant Rameshbhai Kamabhai Parmar was
working as State Bureau Chief, Gujarat in Lemon National News
Channel and was also the editor of "Satya Na Prayogo" a weekly
magazine. The accused No. 1 is the editor and the accused No. 2 is
the executive editor of the daily newspaper "Divya Bhaskar" and
the accused no. 3 is a Crime Reporter for "Divya Bhaskar". On
26/11/2013, a news article was published regarding the arrest of a
mastermind in a conspiracy to kill a builder of Bahucharaji on
page no.09 of daily newspaper "Divya Bhaskar" Gujarat edition
and the accused no. 3 had done the reporting work done for the
daily newspaper Divya Bhaskar. As per the complainant the news
on false facts defaming the applicant was published in the daily
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
newspaper, which was distributed all over the state of Gujarat
including Mahesana City and the said news spoiled the reputation
of the applicant amongst the people, who knew the applicant. The
applicant has filed complaint under Section 500, 501, 502 and 114
of IPC which was registered as Criminal Inquiry No.611 of 2013,
which culminated into Criminal Case No.8338 of 2017.
2.2. The accused were served with the summons and
appeared before the learned Trial Court and their pleas were
recorded at Exhs.27 to 29 and the evidence of the applicant was
taken on record. The applicant has examined 03 witnesses and
produced 04 documentary evidences in support of his case and
after the closing pursis was filed, the further statement of the
accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was
recorded, wherein the accused have denied the publication of any
false news and stated that the news published was as per the
police report and have not defamed the complainant. The accused
refused to stepped into the witness box but examined Police
Inspector J. H. Sindhav as a defence witness. After the evidence of
the accused was closed, the arguments of the learned advocates for
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
both the parties were heard and by the impugned judgment and
order, the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the accused
from the offence under Section 500 of the IPC.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the
applicant has preferred the present application seeking leave to
appeal mainly stating that the learned Trial Court has passed the
impugned judgment and order, which is based on erroneous view
of law. The learned Trial Court has erred in dealing with the
evidence as well as the conclusive proof that are manifestly unjust
and unreasonable. The learned Trial Court has not appreciated the
evidence adduced by the prosecution and the depositions of the
witnesses appropriately and has used different yardsticks for
consideration of evidence relied upon by both the sides. The
learned Trial Court has erred in passing the impugned judgment
though the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable
doubts.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Urvesh Prajapati for the
applicant and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent -
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
State. Perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and
have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on
record of the case.
5. Learned Advocate Mr.Urvesh Prajapati for the
applicant submits that the learned Trial Court has passed the
impugned judgment and order which is based on erroneous view
of law. The learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the
evidence, which are cogent, clear and convincing and has misread
the evidence and the impugned judgment is perverse, erroneous
and contrary to law. The learned Trial Court has not believed the
role of the accused, which is established and proved before the
learned Trial Court by the original complainant and other
witnesses, who have produced a catena of evidence and also the
evidence that the accused had malafidely and intentionally get the
news published on false, fabricated and concocted story about the
complainant. The learned Trial Court has erred in holding that the
evidences produced by the complainant and witnesses are not
sufficient to inspire the confidence. The learned Trial Court has
passed the impugned judgment and the order of acquittal, which
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
is absolutely illegal, unjust, improper, perverse, contrary to the
materials on record, palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous and
demonstrably unsustainable and the same is required to be
interfered with by this Hon'ble Court. Learned advocate has urged
this Court that the leave to appeal may be granted.
6. Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent -
State has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all
the evidence in detail in light of the citations referred to in the
judgment and has passed the judgment and order of acquittal
which is proper and no interference is required and hence the
application for leave to appeal may be rejected.
7. In the present case, the applicant has approached this
Court, seeking redressal for an alleged defamation. It is well-
settled law that in order to sustain action for defamation, two
crucial elements must be established viz (i) the existence of a
defamatory text; and (ii) its publicity. Furthermore, it must be
demonstrated that such defamatory content has caused actual
harm to the reputation of the applicant within society. So far as the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
evidence produced by the applicant to prove the defamatory text
published against the applicant in the newspaper is concerned, it
has come on record that the applicant was released on anticipatory
bail in connection with the FIR being I-C.R.No.86 of 2013 lodged
against him with Bahucharaji Police Station and no false fact in the
paper has been published that the applicant has been arrested by
the L.C.B. Police. The complainant of the FIR being I-C.R.No.86 of
2013 has stated that for the land bearing Survey Nos. 408 and
409/2 has been documented for many years and its owners are the
present owners and on 09.08.2011, one Patel Jayantibhai sold this
land to Parmar Rameshbhai Kamabhai and others and the owners
and occupiers of the above referred land have filed six FIRs against
the present applicant and others. Admittedly, the applicant came
to be arrested in connection with FIR being I-C.R.No.94 of 2013,
and witness Jitendrasinh Hirabhai Sindhav, Police Sub Inspector,
examined at Exh.76, has stated that several FIRs, including one
under Section 307 of the IPC, have been registered against the
applicant; however, the applicant has not challenged the veracity
of these FIRs, which remains uncontroverted. So far as the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
publication of his defamatory text in the newspaper and the
reputation of the applicant in the society is concerned, the
applicant has not examined Jadav Chiragkumar Ganpatbhai and
Barot Rameshbhai Haribhai, who met him in the court. There is no
iota of evidence that the applicant was dismissed as State Bureau
Chief from the Lemon National Chanel and also an amount of
Rs.10,00,000/- as deposit was confiscated. With respect to the
publication of the allegedly defamatory article, it is clear that the
text published in the newspaper was based on the police
complaint filed against the applicant. There is no persuasive
evidence to establish that the article itself caused harm to the
applicant's reputation. The mere publication of the article, based
on an official police complaint, does not, in this instance, amount
to defamation.
8. In light of the above, it is apparent that the applicant
has failed to prove the essential elements of defamation beyond a
reasonable doubt. The Trial Court, after considering and
appreciating the evidence in its entirety, has rightly concluded that
the prosecution's case was not substantiated by the requisite proof
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17081/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/07/2025
undefined
and, therefore, has acquitted the accused from the charges. For the
aforesaid reasons, this Court does not find any merits in the
present application and hence, the same stands dismissed.
9. Record and proceedings be sent to the concerned Trial
Court forthwith.
10. In view of the order passed in the captioned Criminal
Misc. Application, Criminal Appeal No. 28639 of 2023, which is at
filing stage, stands disposed of accordingly.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S. KAZI
