Delhi High Court Quashes Criminal Defamation Case Against Senior Advocate Pinaki Misra, Finds No 'Prima Facie' Case
The Delhi High Court has quashed a 2019 criminal defamation case against senior advocate Pinaki Misra over allegations of calling the complainant a "crook‟ and a "black mailer" in an interview to a news portal.
It was alleged that the complainant had filed a complaint with Bar Council of Delhi in 2018 against the petitioner, alleging that Misra's appearance on behalf of power distribution companies before the National Green Tribunal amounted to professional misconduct. On 26.08.2018, an article was published in a newspaper regarding this complaint.
It was alleged that Misra, in a interview to a news portal published on 24.01.2019, had made defamatory remarks against the complainant allegedly lowering his reputation in the eyes of the public also affecting his professional life.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in her order observed that the complainant had examined himself as the sole witness in the pre-summoning evidence before the trial court.
There was no material on record, in the form of statement of any other person or otherwise, to prima facie demonstrate that the alleged imputation had the effect of lowering the reputation of complainant in the estimation of others, the court said.
"The allegation that the publication caused damage to his reputation, by itself, remains an assertion of the complainant and does not establish the statutory requirement contemplated by Explanation 4 to Section 499 IPC,"the court held.
The court observed that while it was true that at the stage of taking cognizance or issuance of process, the Court is not required to undertake a meticulous appreciation of evidence or conduct a mini-trial.
However , it said, "limited nature of the inquiry at such stage cannot dispense with the requirement that the basic ingredients of the offence which must be prima facie" disclosed from the material placed before the Court.
The court noted that the allegation against Misra was founded upon the contents of an online news report. It said that Misra had specifically denied having given any such interview and to support which he had also addressed a letter dated 22.03.2019 to the Editor of a news establishment Odisha Post, denying having given the alleged interview and seeking publication of a clarification.
"At this stage, it is also relevant to note that the material placed before the learned ACMM does not disclose examination of the concerned reporter or author of the publication, or any person associated with the concerned newspaper/news portal, who could prima facie establish that the alleged words were in fact uttered by the petitioner. Rather, as pointed out by the learned counsel for petitioner, the respondent no. 2 had subsequently arrayed the editor/owner of the said news portal as an accused in the complaint. Thus, apart from the publication itself, there was no independent material before the learned ACMM connecting the alleged statement with the petitioner," the court held.
On an overall conspectus of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the Court was of the view that the continuation of the criminal proceedings against Misra would not serve the ends of justice, particularly when the complainant having examined himself as the sole witness has not placed any material to "prima facie" demonstrate that the alleged imputation had lowered his reputation in the estimation of others.
The court further held that the alleged imputation is founded upon an online news report which has not been supported by examination of the "concerned reporter, author, editor or any other person associated with the news portal" particularly when the petitioner had specifically denied having made the alleged statement and had also addressed a communication seeking clarification in this regard.
The court thus quashed the case and allowed the petition.
Case title: PINAKI MISRA v/s STATE & ANR.
CRL.M.C. 2595/2019 & CRL.M.A. 10414/2019
Appearance:
Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. Rebecca M. John, Senior Advocate with Ms. Anushka Baruah, Ms. Pravir Singh, Mr. Nilanjan Dey, Advocates
Counsel for Respondent Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State with Mr. Divyang Kiswan, Advocate