Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Conviction Of Pattanga Magazine Editor In Defamation Case

The Court observed that the order of taking cognizance is bad in law as the cognizance of the complaint was taken after 8 years from the date of lodging the complaint.

The bench of Justice S. Rachaiah was hearing the Criminal Revision Petition seeking to set aside the order of the lower Court which convicted the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 500, 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code.

Brief Facts-

The prosecution's case is that the complainant G. Ismail Musliyar, an Arabic teacher at several madrasas and a Qatib at various Jumma Masjids, comes from a respectable family with no criminal background. The accused Ando Paul, as the editor of the fortnightly magazine 'Pattanga,' published a defamatory article titled 'Satanic Chronicle of Mylar Ismail of Arkana.' This article allegedly defamed the complainant and his family, leading to public ridicule and inquiries. Consequently, the complainant filed a complaint.

The Court noted that the present matter is related to taking cognizance after 8 years from the date of lodging the complaint for the offences which are punishable with simple imprisonment for 2 years or a fine or both, especially in non-cognizable offences.

The Court perused Section 468 Crpc and observed, “it makes it clear that cognizance should be taken within 3 years if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, but not exceeding 3 years.”

Finally, the Court said that the order taking cognizance is bad in law.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence and allowed the Criminal Revision Petition.