Punjab And Haryana High Court Rejects AAP MP Sanjay Singh's Plea To Quash Defamation Case Filed By Bikramjit Singh Majithia

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar, in its order, observed,

"The summoning order clearly demonstrates application of mind by the learned magistrate at Ludhiana and all relevant issues were duly considered by him before issuing the process."

The matter before the Court

In the year 2016, Bikramjit Singh Majithia filed a complaint under Section 499 IPC read with Sections 500, 501, 502 and 120-B IPC.

Therein, he alleged that on 05.09.2015, Sanjay Singh, had made scurrilous and defamatory statements against him at a rally at Moga in the State of Punjab, which were published in a newspaper.

It was further alleged that again, on 27.12.2015, at a public rally at Fatehgarh Sahib in the State of Punjab, Sanjay Singh made similar statements about him and they were published in newspapers on 28.12.2015.

It was alleged that the import of these statements was that he (Majithia) was involved in drug trafficking.

Based on the Complaint given by Majithia, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana, on January 22, 2016, examined the preliminary evidence, noted the arguments advanced on behalf of the complainant and issued summons to the accused to face trial.

Thereafter, Sanjay Singh filed an application before the learned Magistrate at Ludhiana under Section 205 Cr.P.C., seeking exemption from appearance in the subject complaint case.

However, by order dated 03.05.2017, the Magistrate dismissed the said application.

After his election to the Rajya Sabha, the petitioner again moved an application under Section 205 Cr.P.C. seeking exemption from personal appearance in the case.

By order dated 19.12.2018, the Magistrate dismissed this application also.

Petitioner Sanjay Singh moved HC

Thereafter, Sanjay Singh moved the High Court assailing the order dated 19.12.2018 passed by the Magistrate dismissing his exemption application under Section 205 Cr.P.C. [CRM-M-30800-2019]

Thereafter, he filed a plea praying to quash Complaint No. 69 dated 07.01.2016 pending on the file of the learned Magistrate at Ludhiana. He also challenged the summoning order dated 22.01.2016 passed therein. [CRM-M-42786-2019]

Majithia pointed out that the petitioner (Sanjay Singh) had not attended 90% of the hearings in the complaint case and asserted that merely because he was a Rajya Sabha MP, it did not entitle him to any special privilege.

Court's Order

Regarding CRM-M-30800-2019

The HC observed that the Magistrate had noted that the petitioner had only appeared 6 times, in all, before the Court since the filing of the complaint case and held that no legal right vested in him to seek exemption from personal appearance only on the ground that he had become a Member of the Parliament.

The Court further noted that the Magistrate had further observed that the petitioner was always at liberty to seek exemption from personal appearance whenever the Rajya Sabha was in session, subject to furnishing proof of his attendance.

The court further said,

"In any event, the petitioner (Sanjay Singh) cannot, as a matter of course or as a matter of right, seek exemption from appearance under Section 205 Cr.P.C. as it would essentially be within the discretion of the learned Magistrate to decide as to whether such relief should be granted to an accused in a particular case. No grounds have been made out for this Court to infer that the learned Judge erred in exercise of such judicial discretion while dismissing the application filed by the petitioner."

Regarding CRM-M-42786-2019

This plea was filed by Sanjay Singh seeking to quash the subject complaint case and the summoning order passed therein.

The grounds urged therein were threefold – a) on the merits of the matter; b) on the issue of jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate at Ludhiana to entertain the complaint; and c) on the ground that the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. were not complied with.

While citing the notable rulings of the Apex Court, the Punjab & Haryana HC observed that under Section 202 Cr.P.C., the admitted position in law is that in those cases where the accused resides beyond the area (as is the case with Sanjay Singh) in which the Magistrate exercised his jurisdiction, it is mandatory that the Magistrate conduct an inquiry or investigation before issuing process.

The Court also noted that while ordering issuance of process, the Magistrate must take into consideration the averments in the complaint, the statements of the complainant and the witnesses examined and that there has to be application of mind as to whether the materials brought would constitute an offence and whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused.

In this backdrop, the Court remarked,

"The summoning order clearly demonstrates application of mind by the learned Magistrate at Ludhiana and all relevant issues were duly considered by him before issuing process. This Court therefore finds that the summoning order was passed after due compliance with the requirements of Section 202 Cr.P.C. and there was no violation of the mandate of this statutory provision."

Thus, the Court did not find any grounds made out in either of the petitions warranting interference with the impugned orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana, in relation to Complaint No.69 of 2016.

Case title - Sanjay Singh v. Bikram Singh Majithia [CRM-M-30800-2019 & CRM-M-42786-2019]

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order Here]