Criminal defamation case against ex-CM Chouhan, Ors.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed two pleas filed by Ex-CM Shivraj Singh Chouhan & Ors. to quash criminal defamation case against them and challenged special court orders to summon them.
The criminal defamation case is filed by Congress Rajya Sabha member senior advocate Vivek Tankha.
Justice Sanjay Dwivedi observed “I am fully impressed and agreed with the submission made on behalf of the respondent-complainant (Vivek Tankha) that if no newspaper reporter was cited in the list of witnesses, it does not mean that no other person can be called as witness or the court lacks power to call any person as witness not included in the list of witnesses”.
“Indeed, that is not a ground for terming the material produced as inadmissible”, the court order said.
“The reliefs as claimed by the applicants in this petition cannot be granted”, the court order said.
“The petitions are dismissed”, the court ordersaid.
“It is for the trial Court to see whether the offence under Section 499 of IPC has been committed or not and that can only be determined on the basis of evidence adduced during the trial”, the court order said.
“The public good is a question of fact. Good faith has also to be established as a fact. Ergo, to prove good faith so as to constitute offence of Section 499 of IPC, trial is necessary. It is so observed by the Supreme Court in case of Chaman Lal v. The State of Punjab (1970) 1 SCC 590, which is quoted below:
‘Public good is a question of fact. Good faith has also to be established as a fact.’ ”, the court order said.
As per the Supreme Court, the only thing which is required to be seen before taking cognizance in the matter, whether the material placed before the court is sufficient to take cognizance in the
matter or not, but it does not mean that the Magistrate would form an opinion whether the material is sufficient for conviction, the court order said.
“In the case at hands, in which, evidence was placed before the court to take cognizance in the matter and it will be proved in the trial whether such evidence/material are sufficient to convict the accused or not, but prima facie if the court comes to the conclusion that those evidence cannot be ignored at initial stage, it has no other option but to proceed with the trial and issue summons to the accused to rebut the presumption drawn by the court in respect of the evidence produced before it”, the court order said.
Chouhan and others has challenged the special court order of 22.03.2024 and 02.04.2024 related to their personal appearance in the criminal defamation case.
Tankha, also a senior Supreme Court lawyer, alleged that Madhya Pradesh BJP president VD Sharma, former chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and ex-minister Bhupendra Singh tarnished his image by claiming incorrectly that he was involved in a Supreme Court case related to the Other Backward Class (OBC) quota in the panchayat elections in 2021.
Former MP advocate general Tankha told neither he participated in any court proceedings pertaining to the OBC reservation nor he filed any petition on the issue in the Supreme Court. Tankha has also filed a civil defamation suit of Rs 10 crore against Chouhan, Sharma and Singh.
