# Chandan Mitra and others v. State of U.P. and others

- **Citation:** (2004) 1 ILRA 1
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2003-09-25
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Application No. 7930 of 2003
- **Bench:** S.S. Kulshrestha
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/chandan-mitra-and-others-v-state-of-u-p-and-others-40229
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Cr.P.C.
Section
482-Quashing
of
complaint-aggrieved person-complainant
being member of Ram Chandra Missionfiled complaint against the accused for
publishing
an
article
amounts
of
defamation-whether such complainant is
an aggrieved party? Held' Yes'. The
complaints are not barred by Sec. 199
I.P.C.

Held: Para 8

Where the complainant has reasons to
feel hurt on account of defamation which
is a matter to be determined by the court
depending upon the facts of each case.
The allegations made against "Shri Ram
Chandra Mission" would certainly cause
imputations on each member of the said
Mission and hence they can legitimately
feel a pinch of it. In the present case the
complainants
are
appearing
to
be
aggrieved persons and so they have
every right to bring the complaints.
These all the complaints are not barred
by Section 199 IPC. In this regard it may
also be mentioned that where prima
facie case is made out disclosing the
ingredients of the offence, the powers of
the High Court under Section 482 of the
Code are limited as was observed by the
Apex Court in the case of Medchi
Chemicals
&
Pharma
(P)
Ltd.
vs.
Biological E. Ltd., (2000) 3 SCC 269.
Case referred to:
1973 All Crl cases 1
(2000) 3 SCC 269
1992 supp. 1 SCC 335:
1992 Cr. LJ 527 (SC)
AIR 2003 (SC) 1069
2001 SCC (Crl.) 1254

## Text

http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1 All] Chandan Mitra and others V. State of U.P. and others
1
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 25.9.2003

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.S. KULSHRESTHA, J.

Criminal Misc. Application No. 7930 of 2003

Chandan Mitra and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicants:
Sri Satish Trivedi
Sri Imran Ullah

Counsel for the Respondents:
A.G.A.

Cr.P.C.
Section
482-Quashing
of
complaint-aggrieved person-complainant
being member of Ram Chandra Missionfiled complaint against the accused for
publishing
an
article
amounts
of
defamation-whether such complainant is
an aggrieved party? Held' Yes'. The
complaints are not barred by Sec. 199
I.P.C.

Held: Para 8

Where the complainant has reasons to
feel hurt on account of defamation which
is a matter to be determined by the court
depending upon the facts of each case.
The allegations made against "Shri Ram
Chandra Mission" would certainly cause
imputations on each member of the said
Mission and hence they can legitimately
feel a pinch of it. In the present case the
complainants
are
appearing
to
be
aggrieved persons and so they have
every right to bring the complaints.
These all the complaints are not barred
by Section 199 IPC. In this regard it may
also be mentioned that where prima
facie case is made out disclosing the
ingredients of the offence, the powers of
the High Court under Section 482 of the
Code are limited as was observed by the
Apex Court in the case of Medchi
Chemicals
&
Pharma
(P)
Ltd.
vs.
Biological E. Ltd., (2000) 3 SCC 269.
Case referred to:
1973 All Crl cases 1
(2000) 3 SCC 269
1992 supp. 1 SCC 335:
1992 Cr. LJ 527 (SC)
AIR 2003 (SC) 1069
2001 SCC (Crl.) 1254

(Delivered by Hon'ble S.S. Kulshrestha, J.)

1. All the three applications
purporting to be under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code)
have been brought by Sri Chandan Mitra,
the Editor of The Pioneer CMYK Printech
Ltd. along with Sri Jitendra Verma and
Sri Deepak Mukherji, who are associated
with the said newspaper in either
capacity. In these applications common
questions of law and facts are involved
and so they are taken together for
disposal.

2. Criminal Misc. Application
No.7930 of 2003 relates to the quashing
the
proceedings
of
complaint
case
No.3199 of 2002, Satish Chandan vs.
Jitendra Verma under Section 500 IPC,
Criminal Misc. Application No.7931 of
2003 to the quashing the proceedings of
complaint case No.3200 of 2002, Dr.
Krishna vs. Jitendra Verma under section
500 IPC and Criminal Misc. Application
No.7932 of 2003 to the quashing the
proceedings of complaint case No.3198 of
2002, Dr. Uma vs. Jitendra Verma under
Section 500 IPC. It has been averred that
applicant No.1 is the Editor of the daily
newspaper The Pioneer published by
CMYK Printech Ltd., the applicant No.2
is the Reporter/Author of the alleged
defamatory news article and the applicant
No.3 is the Publisher of the said
http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2004
2
newspaper. They are professionals and
highly skilled persons and associated with
the newspaper industry, which is known
for its integrity and long standing. Smt.
Pragya Prabhati Mishra, the O.P. No.1
who at her own gave the statement which
was published in the Sunday Pioneer
(English) edition on 2.12.2001. Her
husband was also present when her
statement was recorded. He has also been
arraigned as O.P. No.2. At the behest of
such statement made by Smt. Pragya
Prabhati Mishra that news article was
published with the titled "Original sin".
That article is the exact reproduction of
the statement and the allegations made by
O.P. No.1 regarding the agony she
suffered in her life, wherein she was
posed to grow up on incest with full
support of her family which was part of
known religious cult known as "Sahaj
Margi", which according to her is part of
"Shri Ram Chandra Mission". The said
news item made the disclosure of the
events which happened in the life of Smt.
Pragya Prabhati Mishra due to her being
part of the said cult. It has further been
mentioned that even a bare perusal of the
news item would not exhibit anything
defamatory qua the O.P. No.2. In the
above backdrop separate complaints,
under section 500 IPC were brought in the
court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate-II, Saharanpur wherein all the
three applicants were made accused. In all
these complaints it has also been alleged
that the persons arraigned as the accused
had the reason to believe that the news
article dated 2.12.2001 published in the
newspaper would be defamatory and
impute the reputation of the complainant
and the Mission and so they are
responsible for the loss of reputation of
the complainant and the Mission. That
article is said to be false, baseless and
scandalous. To the contrary "Shri Ram
Chandra Mission" is totally a spiritual
institution involved in search of truth
through meditation and Sahaj Marg. The
accused have conspired against the pious
institution by making such defamatory
publication. The persons who were
associated with the said institution have
started changing their views in respect of
said
Mission
as
well
as
of
the
complainants and they have also started
saying
that
the
complainants
were
associated with the institution which is
involved in immoral and anti-social
activities. The trial court after taking into
consideration the allegations made in the
complaints and also the statements of the
witnesses recorded under sections 200
and 202 of the Code found a prima facie
case under section 500 IPC and took the
cognizance.
Simultaneously
summons
were also issued against the accused
applicants.

3. At this stage these proceedings
have been challenged on the ground that
the complainant would not come within
the category of' 'person aggrieved by the
offence' and so all these complaints are
barred by Section 199 of the Code. This
section is mandatory in nature and the
bringing of complaint by third persons
would not be maintainable. In as much no
personal allegations were made by the
accused
applicants
against
the
complainants.
Such
defamation
if
construed to be in respect of any
association or collection of persons, an
individual can not maintain the complaint
saying that he was defamed. There was
no intention on the part of the accused
applicants to have hurt the reputation of
the complainants. Further several such
complaints in other parts of the country,
the reference of which has been given in
http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1 All] Chandan Mitra and others V. State of U.P. and others
3
the petition, have been filed wherein the
proceedings have been stayed by the
respective High Courts,

4. From the perusal of the above
three complaints it is clear that the
complainants are the members of Shri
Ram
Chandra
Mission,
which
is
registered under the Societies Registration
Act and totally a spiritual institution
involved in search of truth through system
of meditation and system of Sahaj Marg.
The Pioneer in its English Edition on
2.12.2001 published an article under the
caption "Rite or wrong? ORIGINAL
SIN", which is said to be totally false,
baseless, derogatory and with a view to
defame the institution in a well planned
conspiracy. It is further said that the news
item
contained
highly
defamatory
imputations against the said institution.
Some passages of the said news item,
which are appearing to be defamatory,
may be extracted herein under:

This is a story that defies all grades
of imagination, of right, of wrong of
possibilities and situations. It is a story of
woman who has grown up on incest with
the full support of her family, who has
serviced an 80 years old guru at the
tender age of all, who has slept with her
father and brother before the very eyes of
her mother and sisters, Who has borne the
children of her father and then passed
them off as her husband's off springs.
This is also the story of a woman who, at
35, has risen above the opiated existence
of sex, sleaze and incest only to save her
daughter from the same fate that she lived
through. As the bizarre case awaits its
second hearing after being reopened on a
year's persistence by a hounded family,
JITENDRA VERMA recounts the story
which details life's unholy twists and
turns.

Back in the Pooja room, the family was
ready for the ritual. Their guru's pooja
hung proudly on the wall and the family
was in full attendance - Pragya's grand
father, father, mother, brother and two
sisters - all without a stitch of clothing on
their stark naked bodies. "Hey nath, tu hi
ek maatra dhyey hain, hamari ekshahyen,
hamari winti mein bandhak hain....

The nude poojas, she recalls, were
followed by group sex in which all family
members had intercourse with each other.
"My grandfather had it with my mother
and my brother was with my sisters and
father and vice verse, "she tells you
rather stoically. For your benefit her
husband adds that the expressionlessness
is the result of years of being doped by the
family which, he explains, is part of the
closed religious cult known as the
sahajmargi. In short, sahajmargi is an
atheist cult which does not believe in any
kind of familial ties., "its only religion
being open sex".

There are no brothers, sisters, father or
mother. All human beings are same. I
was
told
again
and
again.
She
says.".........
Brainwashed with this potent logic day in
and they out, Pragya and scores of other
girls, including her two sisters and five
cousins were donated to the ashram.
Pragya still remembers the day of
initiation when she was taken to a
separate room in the ashram by 30-yearold abhyasani (disciple) Brij Bala,
Thakur. "She gave me some white tablets
to consume and smeared my private parts
with some kind of paste, "says Pragya,
then, she was taken to guru Ranchander's
http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2004
4
room where she was disrobed and
initiated into a system which proved to be
her nemesis. The Guru sex with me and I
was later told that I had been married to
the great man. "Says pragya.......

5. There is no denial from the side of
the accused applicants for making the
publication of the aforesaid news item but
they have given much emphasis that it
was on the basis of the statement made by
Smt. Pragya Prabhati Mishra. The news
item extracted above and also the
allegations made in the complaints are
prima facie libelous and defamatory.
Prima facie offence is made out against
the accused applicants disclosing the
ingredients of the offence under section
500 IPC.

6. It is next urged that the aforesaid
article at the most could affect the
reputation of Sri Ram Chandra Ji Maharaj
of Shahjahanpur or "Shri Ram Chandra
Mission" but it would not in any way
affect to any individual in view of
explanation (2) to Section 499 IPC. In
that regard it may be mentioned that the
complainants are the members of Shri
Ram Chandra Mission. The explanation
(2) in Section 499 IPC reads as under:

"Explanation 2.- It may amount to
defamation
to
make
an
imputation
concerning a company or an association
or collection of persons as such."

7. The aforesaid institution is
registered under the Societies Registration
Act and the complainants are the
members of the association. They have
the locus-standi to bring these complaints.
This can also be answered with reference
to section 199 IPC, which reads as under:

199. Prosecution for defamation. -
(1) No court shall take cognizance of an
offence under Chapter XXI of the Indian
Penal Code (45 of 1860) except upon a
complaint
made
by
some
person
aggrieved by the offence."

8. The expression 'by some person
aggrieved' in Section 199 definitely
indicates that the complainant need not
necessarily
be
the
defamed
person
himself. These words have a wider
connotation than the words 'person
defamed', which is made clear by the use
of the word 'same' before the person
aggrieved. If on the allegations made the
reputation of the entire family is at stake,
his close
relations are directly or
indirectly
affected
thereby,
will be
covered by the expression 'aggrieved
person', as was held in the case of Abdul
Hkim vs. State of U.P., 1973 All. Crl.
Cases 1. Members of "Shri Ram Chandra
Mission" are like the members of one
spiritual body. Where the complainant has
reasons to feel hurt on account of
defamation which is a matter to be
determined by the court depending upon
the facts of each case. The allegations
made
against
"Shri
Ram
Chandra
Mission"
would
certainly
cause
imputations on each member of the said
Mission and hence they can legitimately
feel a pinch of it. In the present case the
complainants
are
appearing
to
be
aggrieved persons and so they have every
right to bring the complaints. These all
the complaints are not barred by Section
199 IPC. In this regard it may also be
mentioned that where prima facie case is
made out disclosing the ingredients of the
offence, the powers of the High Court
under Section 482 of the Code are limited
as was observed by the Apex Court in the
case of Medchi Chemicals & Pharma (P)
http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1 All] Chandan Mitra and others V. State of U.P. and others
5
Ltd. vs. Biological E. Ltd., (2000) 3 SCC
269 may be extracted:

Exercise of jurisdiction under the
inherent power as envisaged in Section
482 of the Code to have the complaint or
the charge-sheet quashed is an exception
rather than a rule and the case for
quashing at the initial stage must have to
be treated as rarest of rare so as not to
scuttle the prosecution. With the
lodgment of first information report the
ball is set to roll and thenceforth the law
takes its own course and the investigation
ensures in accordance with the provisions
of law. The jurisdiction as such is rather
limited and restricted and its undue
expansion is neither practice able nor
warranted. In the event, however, the
court on a perusal of the complaint comes
to a conclusion that the allegations
leveled in the complaint or charge-sheet
on the face of it do not constitute or
disclose any offence as alleged, there
ought not to be any hesitation to rise up to
the expectation of the people and deal
with the situation as is required under the
law. To exercise powers under Section
482 of the Code, the complaint in its
entirety will have to be examined on the
basis of the allegation made in the
complaint and the High Court at that
stage has no authority or jurisdiction to
go into the matter or examine its
correctness. Whatever appears on the
face of the complaint shall be taken into
consideration
without
any
critical
examination of the same. But the offence
ought to appear ex facie on the complaint.
The truth or falsity of the allegations
would not be gone into by the Court at
this earliest stage. Whether or not the
allegations in the complaint were true is
to be decided on the basis of the evidence
led at the trial. So the question is: Can it
be said that the allegations in the
complaint do not make out any case
against the accused nor do they disclose
the ingredients of an offence alleged
against the accused or the allegations are
patently
absurd
and
inherently
improbable so that no prudent person can
ever reach to such a conclusion that there
is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused.

Reliance may also be placed on the cases
of State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal
[1992 Supp 1 SCC 335: 1992 Cr LJ 527
(SC)] and Ajay Mitra vs. State of UP
[AIR 2003, (SC) Page 1069].

9. It has next been contended that
the accused applicants are associated with
the publication of the daily newspaper and
so their personal attendance in the court
would cause enormous hardship to them.
Their personal attendance is desired to be
dispensed with. Reliance has also been
placed on the case of Bhaskar Industries
Ltd. vs. Bhiwani Denim & Apparels Ltd.
and others, 2001 SCC (Crl.) 1254. After
taking cognizance of the offence since the
accused applicants have been summoned
and so in the given circumstances they are
directed to appear before the court
concerned where their bail application
shall be considered and disposed of
expeditiously preferably on the same day.
Till to the recording of the statements
under section 313 of the Code their
personal
attendance
shall
remain
exempted
provided
they
give
an
undertaking in the court that their
presence be noted through counsel.

With the aforesaid directions, the
application is accordingly disposed of.
---------
http:\\allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2004
6
REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 1.12.2003

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.U. KHAN, J.

Civil Misc. Revision No. 702 of 2003

Gauri Shankar Gupta

...Applicant
Versus
Anita Mishra and another ...Respondents

Counsel for the Revisionist:
Sri S.N. Dubey

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri S.K. Gupta

Provincial Small Causes Courts Act,
Section
25-UP
Urban
Buildings
&
Regulation of letting, Rent and Eviction)
Act 1972, Section 3 (a)-necessary partysuit for ejectment and arrears of rentsub tenant being son of the Chief tenantmoved impleadment-rejection thereofheld not proper generally sub tenant is
not necessary party but after death of
tenant in non residential building-all the
hair must be impleaded as necessary
party.

Held- Para 4 and 6

It is settled law that the sub tenant is
not a necessary party to a suit for
eviction filed against the chief tenant
and decree for eviction passed against
chief tenant is binding upon sub tenant.
However, even in the case of sub tenant,
it has been held by the Supreme Court
that in case, he applies for impleadment
during the pendency of a suit for
ejectment and on the objection of the
landlord his application is rejected then
he cannot be evicted under decree of
eviction against the chief tenant (vide
AIR 2002 SC 804).

Accordingly, the revision is allowed. The
impugned
order
is
set
aside
and
revisionist
Gauri
Shankar
Gupta
is
directed to be impleaded as defendant
no.2 in the SCC Suit No. 42 of 2001,
pending before the Additional District
Judge, Court No.2, Kanpur Nagar.

(Delivered by Hon'ble S.U. Khan, J.)

1. This revision u/s 25 PSCC Act,
has been filed by Gauri Shankar Gupta,
whose impleadment application in SCC
Suit No. 42 of 2001 has been rejected by
Additional District Judge, Court No. 2,
Kanpur Nagar, through order dated
24.7.2003
impugned
in
the
instant
revision. The suit has been filed by the
plaintiff/ respondent no. 1, Anita Mishra,
against the respondent no. 2, Azad
Kumar. True copy of the plaint is
annexure 1 to the affidavit, filed in
support of stay application. In para 4 of
the plaint, it is stated that previously Ram
Autar, father of defendant (i.e. Azad
Kumar) was the tenant of the shop in
dispute and after his death. Azad opted for
tenancy and signed the counter foils of
receipts and he alone made payment of
rent. In para 2 of the plaint it has been
stated that the shop in dispute is new
construction, hence provisions of U.P. Act
No. 13 of 1972 do not have any
application and assuming it to be within
the ambit of the said Act, a clear case of
default has been made out. Relief for
eviction and recovery of arrear of rent etc.
has been sought through the said plaint.
Revisionist Gauri Shankar Gupta applied
for impleadment on the ground that he
was also son of Ram Autar, father of the
defendant, hence he also inherited the
tenancy and was necessary or at least
proper party to the suit.

2. In the plaint no date of
construction has been given hence from
bare reading of the plaint, it is not clear