Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 375 (JK)

N. Ram v. Zia-ul-rehman Khan

2008-10-13

SUNIL HALI

body2008
1. Petitioner through this petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. seeks quashment of complaint filed by respondent under Section 153 RPC before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar. He further seeks quashment of order passed by the learned CJM, Srinagar on the complaint of the respondent, whereby cognizance has been taken by learned trial court and process issued against the petitioner. 2. To appreciate the controversy in the present case, factual background in the case is required to be noticed. The petitioner is a Journalist of repute and is the Editor of a Magazine Front Line which has mass circulation in the country. He has been conferred with prestigious award Padma Bhushan for his excellence in the field of journalism. Petitioner further submitted that he was never Editor-in-Chief of the news paper The Hindu which is printed and published from Madras. 3. That a complaint came to be filed by the complainant/respondent in the Court of learned CJM, Srinagar under Section 153 R.P.C. alleging therein that the petitioner had committed an offence under Section 153 R.P.C. by publishing a feature in the newspaper The Hindu which had hurt the religious sentiments of the complainant in particular and the Muslim community in general. It was further alleged in the complaint that upon publication of aforementioned feature in the newspaper, there were wide spread riots in different parts of Srinagar City on 30.10.2001 and people had to come on streets shouting slogans against the publication and asking action against the accused. It was further alleged in the complaint that the police had to resort to teargas shelling to control the situation which resulted into injuries to a number of people. That a reference in particular to the report published in the Daily Kashmir Times in its publication dated 26.11.2001 was that there were violent demonstrations especially in the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar and the Kashmir University and the police had to use batons and lobbed smoke shells to disperse the mob. It was further stated in the said report that students pelted stone on the police and an additional force was deployed in the campus to prevent further disturbance. 4. That based on the aforementioned complaint, learned CJM, Srinagar has taken cognizance of the same and issued process against the petitioner, whereby the petitioner has been directed to appear in person before the trial court. 5. 4. That based on the aforementioned complaint, learned CJM, Srinagar has taken cognizance of the same and issued process against the petitioner, whereby the petitioner has been directed to appear in person before the trial court. 5. The petitioner seeks quashment of complaint and order on the ground that the court below committed an error in entertaining the complaint which on the face of it did not disclose the commission of any offence whatsoever and there was no material or evidence whatsoever on the record which would have otherwise legally prompted the court to take cognizance of the complaint and issue process against him. Moreover, the complainant did not satisfy the ingredients of an offence under Section 153 RPC. The court below committed an error in entertaining the complaint at Srinagar even when the courts at Srinagar did not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint. It is submitted that the aforementioned alleged material was published in Chennai and printed at Delhi. The complaint, if at all to be filed, was to be filed and maintainable only before the courts who have territorial jurisdiction either at Chennai or at Delhi, so Srinagar court could not have entertained such a complaint at all much less could not issue the process against the petitioner. Other ground taken in the petition is that the petitioner has no role in publishing aforesaid news items in the paper as neither he is Executive Director nor Editor-in-Chief of the said paper. 6. On the other hand respondent has submitted that the accused persons had published and printed derogatory caricatures of Holy Prophet of Islam (P.B.U.H.) and the blessed Caliph Hazarat Abu Bakr-e-Sidiq (RA) in their newspaper. When this paper was read over by the people of the area of Kashmir, there were incidents of rioting in different parts of Srinagar. Students of Kashmir University and Regional Engineering College came on streets shouting slogans against the publication and asking for action against the accused and a number of persons were injured. On this a complaint under Section 153 RPC came to be filed before the Court of learned CJM, Srinagar. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On this a complaint under Section 153 RPC came to be filed before the Court of learned CJM, Srinagar. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is not in dispute that newspaper The Hindu had in its publication dated 24.11.2001 published the material which had not only annoyed the Muslim community but created wide spread riots in the Kashmir Valley. The allegation was that in the aforementioned publication, the holy prophet of Islam (PBUH) was depicted pictorially which was not permissible in their religion. 8. A case was registered against the petitioner and other two persons. A perusal of the complaint reveals that the accused had published caricatures of Holy Prophet of Islam (PSUH) and the blessed Caliph Hazrat Abu Bakre-e-Sidiq (RA) in their newspaper because of which there was large scale violence in Kashmir Valley and students in particular came on streets. 9. The petitioners grievance in this petition is that his name has unnecessarily been dragged as neither he is the Editor-in- Chief nor Executive Director of the newspaper The Hindu. As a matter of fact, it was incumbent upon the complainant to place on record a copy of the newspaper indicating the names of the persons who were involved in printing this publication. Without placing on record copy of the newspaper, the Magistrate could not have proceeded in the matter. The petitioner has placed on record a copy of the newspaper The Hindu in which Sh. N.Ravi is shown to be the Editor-in-Chief and Ms. Malini Parthasarti is shown to be the Executive Director. The Magistrate has taken cognizance of only the demonstration being held by the students in Kashmir valley as reported in the newspaper Kashmir Times. No copy of the newspaper The Hindu has been placed along with the complaint in order to indicate the role of the petitioner in publishing the aforesaid news item. On the face of it, the complaint does not reveal the role of the accused in the present case. A copy of the newspaper The Hindu placed on the file of this court reveals that the petitioner is neither the Editor-in-Chief nor Executive Director of the newspaper The Hindu. So, on the face of this position, no process could be issued against the petitioner as he is not involved in any publication. A copy of the newspaper The Hindu placed on the file of this court reveals that the petitioner is neither the Editor-in-Chief nor Executive Director of the newspaper The Hindu. So, on the face of this position, no process could be issued against the petitioner as he is not involved in any publication. It is also important to mention that by reading through the complaint, no offence is made out against the petitioner. 10. In view of the above, I set aside the process issued by the trial court against the petitioner and the proceedings pending before the trial court against the petitioner shall stand quashed. Disposed of along with connected Cr.M.P. if any.