J&K HC Dismisses Plea By Greater Kashmir Newspaper To Quash Defamation Proceedings For Publications Against DAV's Management Committee

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti thus vacated its interim freeze order on the proceedings that had been in force since 2019.

The case stemmed from two news items published in Greater Kashmir in October 2015 and December 2016, which reported on allegations that the DAV Trust had sold school land granted by the government for Rs. 13 crores.

As a consequence the DAV Management Committee, represented by Tej Krishan Ganjoo, Chairman of the Management Committee DAV Public Secondary School, Jawahar Nagar, Srinagar, had filed a criminal complaint under Section 500 of the Ranbir Penal Code, alleging defamation.

The trial court in Jammu admitted the complaint and ordered an inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The inquiry concluded that a prima facie case existed against the three accused - the Editor, Printer/Publisher and Author of the articles and directed issuance of process against them.

Greater Kashmir challenged the trial court's order before the High Court, arguing that the news articles did not amount to defamation and cited a previous judgment of the High Court in Aditya Raj Kaul Vs Naeem Akhter (2021) as a precedent.

Disagreeing with the petitioners Justice Bharti observed that the news articles lacked any references to specific government records or statements from officials to substantiate the allegations of a land sale and an amount of Rs. 13 crores being paid.

The bench said that it would have registered its agreement with Aditya Raj Kaul judgment cited by the petitioners proided the print impression of two news items would have anywhere referred as to by reference to which particular Govt. record and reference to the statement of which particular Govt. official of the Education Department, the two news items had alleged the sale of the school premises that too on the quoted amount of Rs. 13 crores.

“Then a consideration would have been spared to entertain the petitioners in the present petition but that is not the case in the present case”, the bench remarked.

Explaining term “person” as used in Sec 499 Ranbir Penal Code (Pari Materia With 499 IPC) the bench cited section 6(11) of the code and observed that the management Committee of an Educational Institution can also reckon itself to be a victim of defamation at the hands of a person who comes forward with any publication or oral representation bearing imputation intending to harm it.

Commenting on the nature of news articles the court said that the two news articles were too loose ended in terms of thier impression and were prima-facie more on the sensationalization and scandalizing side of the news items rather than on apprising the General Public about state of facts.

Justice Bharti further noted that while Greater Kashmir might have a defense based on the veracity of the reports and access to supporting documents, it however declined its interference observing,

“that all is a matter of the trial for the trial court to take care of and not for this Court to exercise inherent power under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Svt., 1989 to decode the defence of the petitioners in answer to the criminal complaint so filed”.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the petition and directed the trial court in Jammu to resume proceedings in the defamation complaint.

Case Title: Fayaz Ahmed Kaloo Vs Tej Krishan Ganjoo

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 99

Mr. Navyug Sethi, Advocate appeared for the petitioner, Mr. C. M. Koul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. R. Bhat, Advocate represented the respondents.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment