Didn’t Refer To Entire Lawyer Community: Kerala HC Quashes Defamation Case Against Journalist Accused Of Comparing Lawyers With Street Dogs
The Kerala High Court quashed a Defamation case against a Lawyer-cum-Journalist who was accused of comparing Lawyer community with street dogs.
The Court was dealing with a Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed by the accused Advocate Sebastian Paul seeking to quash the proceedings against him.
A Single Bench of Justice G. Girish observed, “A reading of the averments in the original complaint filed by the first respondent before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Taliparamba would go to show that the petitioner did not refer to the entire lawyer community while making the alleged disparaging remarks in the controversial speech.”
Advocate Varada Surendran represented the Petitioner while Public Prosecutor Sangeetharaj represented the Respondents.
In this case, the allegation against the Petitioner/accused was that he made a speech at a gathering of journalists at Kozhikode in 2016 denigrating the lawyer community and thereby committed the offence under Section 500 of Indian Penal Code. The said speech was made at a time when there existed strife between the lawyers and journalists in Kerala in connection with some incidents of tussle between them.
According to the Complainant, the Petitioner compared the lawyer community with street dogs in the said speech which was published and telecasted by the print and visual media. The said Complaint was taken into files by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Taliparamba and summons were ordered to the accused. Hence, the Petitioner was before the High Court.
The High Court in view of the above facts, noted, “… what had been mentioned by him was the so-called violent behaviour displayed by a group of lawyers who were involved in the fight with journalists. In this context, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner himself is a lawyer having practice in various courts including this Court.”
The Court added that the controversial remarks made by the Petitioner in his speech cannot be said to be one intended to denigrate the entire lawyer community.
“As such, it cannot be said that the above remarks of the petitioner had caused harm to the reputation of the first respondent as a member of the lawyer community. When viewed in the above perspective, it is not possible to conclude that the first respondent is a ‘person aggrieved by the offence’ as contemplated under sub Section (1) of Section 199 Cr.P.C.”, it said.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition and quashed the proceedings.
Cause Title- Sebastian Paul v. P.R. Ashokan & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:93046)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Varada Surendran and Deepak Mohan.
Respondents: Public Prosecutor Sangeetharaj, Advocates V.T. Madhavanunni, and V.A. Satheesh.
