Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Defamation Proceedings Quashed Against Journalist of Daily Ajit and Ajit Samachar

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision on January 4, 2024, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana set a significant precedent in a defamation trial involving a renowned journalist and Managing Editor of ‘Daily Ajit’ and ‘Ajit Samachar’. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara presided over the case, emphasizing the importance of factual basis in legal proceedings, especially in defamation cases.

The petitioner, who has been embroiled in this legal battle for over 15 years, challenged the dismissal of his criminal revision petition by the Sessions Court. The case revolved around the publication of news allegedly defaming an IPS officer, leading to a prolonged legal dispute.

In his judgment, Justice Chitkara meticulously examined the pleadings and evidence, applying judicial precedents and relevant laws. He noted, “The complaint did not disclose any offense committed by the petitioner, and there was no sufficient prima facie evidence based on which they could have been summoned.”

Highlighting the essential distinction between editorial roles, the Court pointed out that the petitioner, being the Managing Editor and not the Chief Editor, was not responsible for the content published. “The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the first and ninth exceptions to S. 499 IPC, which makes the order of summoning bad in law,” Justice Chitkara observed, providing significant relief to the journalist.

The decision to quash the summons and all subsequent proceedings was grounded in the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC, with the Court stating that non-interference would have resulted in a miscarriage of justice. This ruling is a testament to the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice and the importance of adhering to the strictures of legal evidence in defamation cases.

Date of Decision: 04.01.2024

Barjinder Singh Hamdard VS Param Vir Rathee, IPS

Latest Legal News