Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 199(2) & (4) — Defamation of public servant — Complaint by Public Prosecutor — Maintainability — “Person aggrieved” — Government as complainant — Held, Government not a “person” within meaning of Section 199(2) CrPC — State cannot maintain criminal defamation unless specific constitutional authority/public servant covered under Section 199(2) is defamed — Complaints filed by “State Public Prosecutor” without statutory authority — Not maintainable — Cognizance set aside.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 200 and 202 — Mandatory compliance — Accused residing beyond territorial jurisdiction — Post-2005 amendment — Inquiry under Section 202 mandatory before issuance of process — Failure to conduct inquiry — Vitiates cognizance — Proceedings void ab initio.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 199(2) — Special procedure — Role of Public Prosecutor — Must act independently — Cannot act as “post office” of Government — Absence of independent scrutiny — Sanction mechanically granted — Prosecution unsustainable.
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 499, 500, 501, 502 — Criminal defamation — Essential ingredient — Mens rea — Intention to harm reputation — Generalised criticism of Government — Not defamation — Government as abstract entity not defamable — Unless specific official targeted.
Constitution of India — Articles 19(1)(a), 19(2), 21 — Freedom of press — Criminal defamation — Balance between reputation and free speech — Legitimate criticism of governance protected — Prosecution to silence dissent impermissible.
Criminal Revision — Order taking cognizance — Nature — Intermediate order — Revisable — Maintainability affirmed following Girish Kumar Suneja and Madhu Limaye.
Sanction for prosecution — Mechanical sanction — Non-application of mind — Vitiates entire proceedings.
Result — Criminal Revision Cases allowed — Cognizance and consequential proceedings quashed.
