Allahabad High Court Quashes Defamation Case Filed Against BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh By A Journalist

The Allahabad High Court has QUASHED a criminal defamation complaint case filed against Bharatiya Janata Party MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. The complaint, filed by a Lucknow-based freelance Journalist (Mohd Kamran), alleged that MP Singh wrote letters to State Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath defaming him.

A bench of Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan observed that the letters in question appeared to be confidential and privileged communication between two constitutional authorities (Member of Parliament and Chief Minister). The Court also noted that the evidence on record did not suggest that MP Singh caused the letters in question to be published in the print media or digital media or on social media platforms.

Importantly, the Court added that the letters in question would fall under the ambit of the 8th Exception of Section 499 IPC (Accusation preferred in good faith to the authorised person) and that the trial Court, while passing a summoning order to MP Singh, did not follow the procedure laid down in the amended provision of Section 202 CrPC.

"The trial Court has not directed any investigation under 202 Cr.P.C. even when the material available before it was not sufficient to summon the applicant to face trial under Section 500 I.P.C. Thus, the instant case appears to be covered by guidelines No.1 and 7 of Bhajan Lal (supra) and Exception Eighth of Section 499 I.P.C. Thus, I am of the considered view that permitting these criminal proceedings to continue against the applicant, would be nothing but abuse of process of law/ Court and requires interference of this Court," the Court remarked further as it quashed the defamation complaint.

The case in brief 

It was the case of the complainant that Lok Sabha MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh wrote letters to the Chief Minister defaming him by stating that he had serious cases to his credit and yet the UP government had recognized him as an independent journalist.

Allegedly, the letters stated that various criminal cases pertaining to hatching conspiracy of exhortation, intimidation, theft and of molestation are registered against the complainant (Dr Kamran) in different police stations and various newspapers have been registered by the complainant giving different addresses and also that while he was pursuing his LLB, he was acting as a full-fledged freelance journalist.

It was also alleged that Singh, by circulating these letters in print media and digital media platforms, harmed and tarnished the reputation of the complainant. On his complaint, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III (MP/ MLA), Lucknow passed an order summoning Singh to face trial U/S 500 IPC.

Consequently, MP Singh moved the HC seeking the quashing of the said order of the MP MLA Court.

Arguments put forth

The counsel appearing for Singh, Purnendu Chakraborty, argued that the trial Court while passing the impugned order, did not consider the amended provision of Section 202 CrPC whereby it is obligatory on the part of the trial Court to either enquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by any other person to decide whether or not there are sufficient grounds for proceeding as the applicant/ accused was a resident of another district.

It was also argued that the said order had been passed without any application of mind and simply based on a recording of the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and of his witnesses recorded under Section 202 CrPC.

Lastly, it was also contended that the letters in question were confidential documents and there was no iota of evidence or material which may even remotely suggest that it was the applicant who had leaked these papers in the media.

On the other hand, the counsel for the complainant argued that the letters allegedly written by the accused/ applicant were also printed in some newspapers, which caused serious harm, loss and damage to his reputation and the same had spoilt his name and reputation in the eyes of his friends, relatives and the general public.

High Court's observations 

Explaining the legal position regarding the responsibility of the Trial Court while summoning a proposed accused in a complaint case, the Court observed that as per Section 202 CrPC, it is incumbent on the Magistrate or the Trial Court, as the case may be, to either make an enquiry himself or to refer an investigation under Section 202 CrPC, if the proposed accused person is resident of another district.

The Court further noted that the purpose of this inquiry or investigation, as the case may be, is to safeguard the interest of a proposed accused, who may be arrayed as an accused only on the basis of rivalry or for any other ulterior motive. 

Against this backdrop, when the Court considered the factual matrix of this case in the background of legal position, the Court observed that the applicant (MP Singh) had merely written the said letters as a public representative after certain complaints were brought to his knowledge about the alleged activities of the complainant.

"...it cannot be said that the letters which have been written by the applicant have been written intentionally with a motive to tarnish the image of the complainant/ opposite party No.2 and these letters appear to have been written, so that public authorities may be made aware of the grievances of the persons, to whom the applicant is representing," the Court observed.

The Court added that there was no evidence to show that MP Singh had anything to do with the publication of such letters and that the trial Court while passing the impugned order, did not consider the ingredients of the offences to assess whether the alleged statement made by the applicant fell under any of the exceptions of Section 499 IPC.

The Court further opined that the trial court failed to examine the question as to whether the communication between the applicant and Chief Minister or the Chief Secretary of the State is a privileged communication or even as to whether there is any material or evidence at all available on record which may suggest that it was the applicant who had leaked the letter into the print media or social media and in absence of the same, the order of the trial Court may not stand the scrutiny of law.

In view of this, noting that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the entire criminal proceedings against MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.

Appearances 

Counsel for Applicant: Purnendu Chakraborty, Sachin Upadhyay, Amandeep Singh, Shivendra S Singh Rathore, Tajdar Ahmad

Counsel for Opposite Party: G.A., Arvind Kumar Tewari, Ashish Kumar Mishra, Gaurav Tewari, Pramod Kumar Shukla

Case title - Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 167

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 167

Click Here To Read/Download Order