The Madras High Court today quashed a criminal defamation case filed against Tamil daily "Dinamalar" by a Tamil Nadu Minister in a sessions court over a news report published in December 2014, holding no malafide has been attributed to the daily.
The court was allowing a criminal original petition by the daily's Editor and Publisher R Krishnamurthy and R Lakshmipathy respectively seeking to quash the defamation case filed by the state Handlooms and Textiles Minister before the Principal Sessions Judge court here.
Justice R.S. Ramanathan held that no malafide has been attributed to the petitioner and it cannot be stated that the report was published in a careless manner.
The Judge said as the report did not contain any defamatory allegation either against the Minister or against the Ministry or against any particular individual, the complaint filed on behalf of the Minister "is misconceived and the complaint is liable to be dismissed," he ruled.
"A reading of the passage given in the (defamation) complaint, in my opinion, does not make any imputation against any particular individual," he said.
The Judge said a general comment was made that by dyeing the yarn for the purpose of giving shining appearance, quality of the yarn would deteriorate and production would also be affected. It was further stated in the report that there was slackness in the manufacture of dhotis due to shortage of labourers, raising a doubt whether before Pongal festival, free dhotis and sarees would be distributed to common people.
"According to me, the above passage only reflected the information received by reporter and no imputation was made against the Minister or against particular Ministry," he said.
The matter related to the news item published by Dinamalar in its edition dated December 21 last year under the caption "Whether the distribution of (free) dhotis and sarees to the public will be made available before Pongal".
City Public Prosecutor had filed the criminal defamation case against the Editor and the Publisher on behalf of the Minister claiming that the report was published to defame the state Minister for Handlooms and Textiles.
I.Subramanian, Senior Counsel appearing for the daily, submitted that the news was published in public interest and no defamatory statement was made against the Minister or against particular Ministry and therefore, it will not come under the scope of Section 500 IPC (defamation).
The Public Prosecutor submitted that "false" information was given in the news item that only 60 per cent of production was achieved but the actual production was more than 65 per cent and therefore, without verifying the information from the department, the news was given to defame the Minister.
Rejecting the arguments of the Public Prosecutor, the Judge in his order said "...As stated supra, the news item only gives some figures on the basis of information received by the reporter and if the report is not correct, it is open to the Ministry to give publication with clarification."
By giving some information regarding percentage of production, which according to the prosecution are not correct, it cannot be stated that the petitioner has committed the offence of defamation, he said.
