Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.G..SAHADEVAN versus N.SOMAN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.G..SAHADEVAN v. N.SOMAN - CRL A No. 698 of 1999(A) [2007] RD-KL 2321 (31 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL A No. 698 of 1999(A)

1. V.G..SAHADEVAN
... Petitioner

Vs

1. N.SOMAN
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR

For Respondent :SRI.C.K.SAJEEV

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY

Dated :31/01/2007

O R D E R

J.B.KOSHY, J.

Crl.Appeal No.698 of 1999

Dated this the 31st day of January, 2007

Judgment This appeal is filed by the complainant who filed a private complaint alleging offences punishable under sections 500 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34 IPC. The complainant was a peon in the Government U.P.School, Nedumprakad. A1 and A2 are teachers in the above school. According to him, at the instance of A1 and A2 who are teachers, A3 published a poster containing defamatory statement against the complainant. Persons in the locality came to see the poster and thereby reputation of the complainant was lowered in the eyes of the public. Accused persons denied their involvement in the matter. After going through the evidence, the trial court found that there was no evidence to prove that who made the above poster and who published the same. There was absolutely no evidence to show that it was published at the instance of A1 and A2. The alleged defamation statement is regarding the taking of some wooden goods kept in the school. Even PWs 2 and 3 has stated that PW1, the complainant had taken the goods from the school and the same has been returned to the school. Cost of the goods was only Rs.450/- and for Crl.A.No.698 of 1999 2 realisation of the amount, PTA has also filed a suit which was later dismissed. Then court found that the complainant has failed to prove that the poster has lowered the reputation of the complainant. It was further found that even the headmaster who was the best witness was not examined. On going through the evidence, I am also of the opinion that ingredients of the offence under section 500 are not satisfied. In these circumstances, I see no ground to interfere in the order of acquittal in the appeal proceedings and the appeal is dismissed. J.B. KOSHY

(JUDGE)

vaa Crl.A.No.698 of 1999 3 J.B.Koshy J. Crl.A.No.698 of 1999 Judgment 31-1-2007


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.