Punjab & Haryana HC Declines To Quash Summons In Defamation Case Against IAF Officer For Calling Former Deputy Army Chief 'Coward'

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed a plea seeking quashing of summons in a defamation case against a former IAF officer for calling a former Deputy Army Chief, a "coward."

Vinod K. Gandhi, a former Officer in the Indian Air Forces allegedly circulated an email wherein he referred to the Deputy Army Chief Lt. Gen. Raj Kadyan, as a "coward."

While refusing to quash the summons, Justice Harkesh Manuja said, "Perusal of the emails brought on record...shows that the accused/petitioner has in so many words called respondent No. 2 before a group of veterans along with insinuation that he is a “coward”, which cannot be said to have been done in good faith. Apart from the word “coward”, in the emails sent by the accused/petitioner, there are other contents as well which does not suit the prestige of a decorated army officer who has served the nation for approximately 40 odd years."

Court added that concerning the definition of the word “coward”, it is required to be looked into whether the general meaning applicable to an ordinary person, can also be made applicable in the specific context of defence personnel, for whom it could be more insulting.

A criminal complaint was filed by Kadyan, seeking summoning of petitioner u/s 499/500 IPC (defamation) on the allegations that the complainant was a decorated officer, having won medals while serving in the Indian Army and retired in the year 2012 from the post of Deputy Chief of Army Staff. 

The complainant also alleged that the emails circulated by the accused alleging that either the complainant was a very revengeful man or he was mentally unstable and both connotations were not good for veterans and veterans' families.

The accused, Vinod K. Gandhi moved the High Court seeking to set aside the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram (Haryana) whereby the order passed by JMIC, Gurugram summoning the petitioner was upheld.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the summoning order was issued by the trial Court against the petitioner without taking into consideration the fact that his case was covered under exceptions 4 and 5 to Section 499 IPC.

Considering the submission, the Court noted that, "It is not the case of the petitioner that he has not written the emails, rather his case is that he is covered under exceptions 4 and 5 of Section 499 IPC. It is also required to be noted that vide order dated 07.11.2017, the accused/petitioner has not been held guilty under Section 499 IPC, rather he has only been summoned by the trial court to face trial."

It added that at the stage of summoning only a prima facie case has to be seen by the trial court and possible defence of the accused is not required to be looked into.

To justify his case under exceptions 4 and 5 to Section 499 IPC, the petitioner submitted that his "coward" remark was based on the observation of Kadyan's superiors recorded in an Apex Court case related to his service, wherein it was stated that he “...should be bold and aggressive in operation.”

However, the Court said, "If someone is termed as “not bold or aggressive” might mean that one might not be offensive enough as demanded in war circumstances which could not necessarily mean in all probabilities that the person is coward."

The Court further added that the exercise of going into the details of the word “coward” and other alleged defamatory contents and applicability of the exceptions of Section 499 IPC can be looked into during the trial only.

In light of the above, Justice Manuja dismissed the petition and refused to quash the summons.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 38

 A.D.S. Jattana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana

 Amit Jhanji, Sr. Advocate with  Nandita Verma, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

Title: Vinod K Gandhi v. State of Haryana & Anr

Click here to read/download the order