SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ch. Ramoji Rao, Chairman Ramoji Group of Companies and Another
Vs
State of Andhra Pradesh
Appeal (Crl.) 1050 of 2006 (Arising Out of Slp (Crl.) No. 3802 of 2006)
(Arijit Pasayat and L. S. Panta, JJ)
13.10.2006
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
Leave granted.
Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned
Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the application filed
by the appellants in terms of Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.'). The prayer was to quash
the proceedings in CC No. 2/2006 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions
Judge, City Criminal Courts at Hyderabad. The State of Andhra Pradesh
represented by Special Public Prosecutor filed a complaint under Section 200
read with Section 199 Cr.P.C. stating that with a common intention intending to
harm the reputation of the Government, of its administration, of the Chief
Minister, several minister and several public servants made a telecast on E
TV-2 channel with commentary knowing fully that the same would harm reputation
of public functionaries. The voice over the commentary was that of the
appellant no.2. Many expressions and words used in commentary are per se
defamatory. The appellants filed a petition in terms of Section 482 Cr.P.C. The
stand was that the complaint was nothing but gross abuse of process of Court.
The respondent opposed the application stating that on the facts alleged no
interference in terms of Section 482 Cr.P.C. was called for. With reference to
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short
'IPC') the High Court dismissed the application, holding that a prima facie
case existed and, therefore, no interference was called for.
Though many points were urged in support of the appeal, leaned counsel for the
appellants submitted that actually there was no intention in any manner to harm
reputation of the Chief Minister, of the Ministers or the officials and,
therefore, continuance of the proceedings would not be in public interest.
Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that after
showing the Chief Minister, ministers and the public officials in poor light,
the appellants cannot take the plea of innocence.
After hearing learned counsel at some length, we think that public interest
would be best served in directing following broadcast to be made in the
concerned TV channel by the appellants within a period of one week from today.
The telecast would be as follows:-
"A news telecast had been made by the channels E TV-2 on 22.11.2005
covering the visit of the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh alongwith some of
his ministers and officials to Putta Parthi Sai Baba. The voice over commentary
for the said telecast was provided by Smt. Kalyani. It is clarified on behalf
of channel E TV-2 that the content of the voice over commentary was not
intended in any manner to defame or harm the reputation of the Chief Minister
or his entourage of ministers and officials. If it has been construed that way,
it is clarified that same was not the intent and purpose of the
broadcast."
Learned counsel for the appellants has stated that to show the bonafides the
appellants shall make the necessary broadcast within the time indicated.
Learned counsel for the parties have agreed that all proceedings relating to
the broadcast shall be withdrawn and shall not be pursued.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of.