Karnataka High Court Quashes Defamation Case Against Congress Leader Over Remarks On The Word 'Hindu'

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a defamation case registered against Congress Leader and Member of Legislative Assembly Satish Jarikholi, who was charged under Section 500 and 153 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging to have hurt the sentiments of Hindus as he made a statement that the word “Hindu” has a dirty meaning.A single judge Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Jarkiholi and said, “This is a case where 'not' a definite class of people is alleged to be defamed but an indefinite class. The very concept of defaming an indefinite class cannot lead to the offence punishable under Section 500 of the IPC, as the purport of Section 499 and the Explanation is that it should be against a definite class of people.” Elaborating further it noted Section 499 has several exceptions and also certain explanations. Defamation would be to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such, as per Explanation-2 to Section 499 of the IPC. Placing reliance on Apex court judgment in the case of G. Narasimhan v. TV Chokkappa (1972), the Court held, “In the considered view of the Court this description is of a determinate group and is not a description of an indeterminate group. The offence of defamation cannot be laid against an indeterminate group is by now a settled principle of law. Explanation-2 saves the act of 14 defamation under Section 499 insofar as the case at hand is concerned.” In regard to Section 153 of IPC which penalises wantonly giving provocative statement with intent to cause riot, Court held, “The statement of the petitioner nowhere would meet the ingredients of Section 153.” Jarkiholi's statement was published by the media following which, one Dilip Kumar contending to be from Nair community and a Hindu by religion, filed a private complaint. Following the direction of the Magistrate court, Police had registered an FIR in the.Seeking quashing of FIR, Jarkiholi argued that there cannot be an act of defamation against an indeterminate group and Hindu cannot form a determinate group. The other offence alleged under Section 153 of the IPC also would not get attracted in the case at hand.Allowing the petition the court said “Permitting further proceedings would become an abuse of the process of the law and result in miscarriage of justice.” Appearance: Advocate B S Sreenivas for Sundeep Kumar B U for Petitioner.HCGP Dharmapal for Respondent. Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 513Case Title: Satish Jarkiholi AND Dilip Kumar Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.8574 OF 2024Click Here To Read/Download Order

Karnataka High Court Quashes Defamation Case Against Congress Leader Over Remarks On The Word 'Hindu'

Mustafa Plumber

Tags