Hemalatha vs Radha Venuprasad
2022 Latest Caselaw 1329 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1329 Mad
Judgement Date : 28 January, 2022

Madras High Court

Hemalatha vs Radha Venuprasad on 28 January, 2022

                                                                                    Crl. O.P. No.26260 of 2017

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                         Dated 28.01.2022

                                                            CORAM:

                                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

                                                 Crl. O.P. No.26260 of 2017 and
                                               Crl.M.P.Nos.15129 & 15130 of 2017

                     Hemalatha                                                  . . . Petitioner

                                                               Versus
                     Radha Venuprasad                                          . . . Respondent


                     PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call
                     for the records relating to C.C.No.716 of 2017, pending on the file of the
                     learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur and quash the same.


                                       For Petitioner        : M/s.A.P.Sathyamurthy

                                       For Respondents       : No appearance


                                                             ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the private

complaint in C.C.No.716 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Alandur for the offence under Sections 193, 499 and 500 of IPC.

Page No:1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P. No.26260 of 2017

2. The respondent/defacto complainant has preferred a complaint under

Sections 190(1)(a) and 200 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and other accused by

way of separate calendar cases on the allegation that this petitioner along with

other accused had participated in a press meet held on 09.08.2013 making

allegations against the respondent and thereby, her reputation has been spoiled.

For which, the present complaint has been filed for the offence under Sections

193, 499 and 500 of IPC.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner has not uttered the name of the respondent anywhere and he has

restricted her statement to the extent of her limited knowledge about the dispute

and the act of the respondent. He further submitted that her statements is also

fall within the extent of Ninth Exception of Section 499 of IPC. Therefore, he

prayed to quash the proceedings.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/defacto complainant

submitted that there were serious allegations made by the petitioner which

lowered the reputation of the de facto complainant, the same attracts the offence

Page No:2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P. No.26260 of 2017

under Sections 193, 499 and 500 of IPC. Hence, he opposed to quash the

proceedings.

5. This Court has perused the entire materials available on

record. The allegations in the complaint indicate that the petitioner has casted

certain unwarranted aspersions about the defacto complainant.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner referred

Ninth Exception of Section 499 IPC, which reads as follows:

“Ninth Exception: Imputation made in good faith by

person for protection of her or other's interest.

It is not defamation to make an imputation on the

character of another, provided that the imputation be made in

good faith for the protection of the interests of the person

making it, or of any other person, or for the public good”.

7. In view of the Ninth Exception under Section 499 of IPC, it is made

Page No:3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P. No.26260 of 2017

clear that to fall within the said exception, the imputation should be made in

good faith, which is a matter of evidence and the same cannot be gone at

this stage. This Court cannot apply the exception blindly while exercising its

power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. When the complaint itself discloses the

various statements said to have been made by the petitioner, it has to be tested

only in the trial Court. Whether or not the charges levelled against the

petitioner are proved, has to be decided by adducing evidence before the trial

Court and not in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In such view of the

matter, I do not find any merits in this petition.