HC quashes Naeem Akhter’s complaint against then VC JKPCC

Excelsior Correspondent

SRINAGAR, Apr 12: High Court quashed a defamation case filed by former minister and senior PDP leader Naeem Akhtar against then Vice Chairman of JKPCC Sheikh Khalid Jahangir.
Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held that the complaint filed by former R&B minister, Naeem Akhtar is not constituting the offence of defamation against Khalid Jahangir.
Justice Wani while quashing the complaint as well as order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar on November 16, 2018 summoning Jahangir held that the offence under Section 499 (defamation) is not made out.
The plea filed by Jahangir stated that upon his appointment as Vice Chairman on the Board of Directors of J&K Project Construction Corporation (JKPCC) in 2017 addressed a letter to the then Governor of J&K, pointing out various acts of omission and commission having surfaced in the Corporation including that the Works Minister on verbal directions had allotted prestigious projects of high importance to inexperienced some blue eyed persons in the construction field without tenders and following of codal procedure.
In the letter, he had made a request for the constitution of a Fact Finding Committee for investigating said matters so that the Government exchequer and money of the masses is not looted anymore and till such time investigation is completed to put halt on the said works.
Later on, Akthar instituted a complaint against Jahangir alleging that the accused with the malicious intent to tarnish the image and the reputation of the complainant wrote the letter to the Governor of J&K leveling baseless allegations of corruption and favoritism.
He stated in the complaint that the letter came to be broadcasted by various TV news channels including Republic TV besides being published in various daily newspapers and in the process by the said defamatory and mala fide action caused irreparable damage to the complainant’s image and reputation in the eyes of his well wishers and in the society.
Analyzing the law on subject, the court noted that in order to constitute an offence of defamation, the essential ingredient is to make an imputation concerning any person with intention to harm or with a knowledge or reason that such imputation will harm the reputation of the said person and an imputation without an intention to harm or without knowledge or having reason to believe that it will harm the reputation of such person will not constitute an offence of defamation.
Justice Iqbal underscored that the petitioner in the capacity as Senior Office Bearer of a Public Sector Corporation has reported the allegations to the Governor.
“Such report/allegations leveled by the accused petitioner herein indisputably is an accusation made to a lawful authority by the senior officer of the Corporation making the public conduct of the complainant/respondent herein the subject of comment for public good after having noticed certain acts of omission and commission committed in the running of the affairs of the Corporation as otherwise also every citizen has a right to comment on those acts of public men which concerns him as a citizen of the Country, if he does not make his commentary a cloak for Malice and Slander,” the court said.
The court pointed out that the letter addressed to the former Governor resulted in issuance of a government order on November 2018 whereby sanction came to be accorded to the Constitution of Fact Finding Committee comprising of Senior Officers of the Government for looking into the matters/acts of alleged omission and commission pointed out by the petitioner in his.
“Having regard to the contents of the impugned complaint and the material attached thereto inasmuch as upon the legal principles against the petitioner, it can safely be said that the offence under Section 499 is not made out,” Court said
The court noted that it is apparent that the Magistrate has exhibited lack of application of mind to the material on record and instead seemingly has approached very lightly and in a mechanical manner in the matter while passing the impugned order.