Skip to main content

HC: A defamation complaint of a deceased person can be lodged only by 'family members' or 'near relatives'

 The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that only the family members or “near relatives” of the deceased person can file a complaint of defamation on any such findings, as only they can acquire the status of “persons aggrieved” in order to file a complaint under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.


Case of the Complainant


Sant Kanwar, an Arya Samajist and freedom fighter had filed a defamation complaint againt former MP Raj Kumar Saini alleging that he made several defamatory statements against late Hooda. Thus Saini moved High Court in order to quash the complaint and the summoning order passed by the magistrate in the present case.


Observation of the Court


The Court reiterated the provisions of Section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, observing that a defamation complaint can be made by a “person aggrieved” Justice Sanjay Kumar further stated that Explanation 1 to Section 499 of IPC that imputing anything to a deceased person would amount to defamation, if such imputation would have harmed the reputation of that person had he been living and such imputation is intended to be harmful to the feelings of the family or other near relatives.


In the words of the Court:


"The statutory scheme therefore indicates that the” person aggrieved” must have an element of personal interest, being either the person defamed himself or in the case of a deceased person, his family member or other near relative. It may also be noted that Section 320 Cr.P.C. permits compounding of the offence of defamation but it is only the person who is defamed who can agree to the same”


Thus Court observed that in the present case, the complainant does not claim to be a member of the family of late Chaudhary Matu Ram Hooda or his near relative. Therefore the complaint was quashed and was not maintainable in the eyes of law.It was made vivid by the Court in its observations that Explanation 1 of Section 499 makes it explicitly clear that it is only the “family members” or “near relatives” of the deceased person, against whom charges have been framed can claim and come within the ambit of “aggrieved persons”.


However, the same cannot be found to met in the present case, there can be no implication of Section 199 of the Cr.P.C., hence the complaint stands not maintainable in the court of law.

Before: Punjab and Haryana High Court


Case Title: Raj Kumar Saini v. Sant Kanwar


Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjany Kumar.

.

LEXIS AND COMPANY
"ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS"
We are India’s Leading Law Firm
“The firm has always strives to create and implement innovative and effective methods of providing cost-effective, quality representation and services for our clients and will continue to meet and exceed the expectations of our valued clients.”

–    DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA (ADVOCATE, FOUNDER-LEXIS AND COMPANY).

Get in Touch

LEXIS AND COMPANY.
C/O: DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA.
OFFICE: A1B/26, JANAKPURI, GROUND FLOOR,
NEW DELHI,, DELHI, 110058.
INDIA.
lexisandcompany@gmail.com
CALL: +91-9830333388.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected
Post a Comment
Read more

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre
Post a Comment
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct
Post a Comment
Read more