Defamation: SC dismisses retired IPS officer's plea against quashing of summons to Abhay Chautala
Defamation: SC dismisses retired IPS officer's plea against quashing of summons to Abhay Chautala
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea filed by a retired IPS officer challenging an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which quashed the summoning of Indian National Lok Dal chief Abhay Singh Chautala in a defamation case filed against him by the officer in 2008.
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma said it was not inclined to interfere with the high court order.
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by Param Vir Rathee challenging an order dated December 19, 2023, of the high court which quashed the summoning of Chautala.
The retired IPS officer had filed a complaint against Chautala and some other persons in August 2008 alleging that he made defamatory statements against the officer, which were published in various newspapers, and has caused irreparable loss/damage to his reputation.
A Gurugram court had summoned Chautala in 2010 which was challenged by Chautala before additional district and sessions court, which upheld the order. This order was challenged before the high court.
The high court quashed the summoning order, observing that during the preliminary evidence led by Rathee it was not established that Chautala had made the alleged defamatory statements.
{{/usCountry}}The high court quashed the summoning order, observing that during the preliminary evidence led by Rathee it was not established that Chautala had made the alleged defamatory statements.
{{/usCountry}}"The complaint does not utter a single word of any prior ill-will of the petitioner against the complainant. The complainant did not plead in the complaint or establish in his testimony in the preliminary evidence any oblique motive, malice, ill-will, mala fide intention of the petitioner, or intention to defame him.
{{/usCountry}}"The complaint does not utter a single word of any prior ill-will of the petitioner against the complainant. The complainant did not plead in the complaint or establish in his testimony in the preliminary evidence any oblique motive, malice, ill-will, mala fide intention of the petitioner, or intention to defame him.
{{/usCountry}}"Given the above, it is a fit case for this court to prevent the abuse of the process of law because the allegations made in the complaint and the preliminary evidence do not point out that the public statements allegedly made by the petitioner were made with any malicious intent against the complainant," the high court had said.
{{/usCountry}}"Given the above, it is a fit case for this court to prevent the abuse of the process of law because the allegations made in the complaint and the preliminary evidence do not point out that the public statements allegedly made by the petitioner were made with any malicious intent against the complainant," the high court had said.
{{/usCountry}}This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
