HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.216 of 2010 Date: December 08, 2011 Between: Savithala Bharathudu … Petitioner And 1. D. Subashchandra Bose & another … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.216 of 2010 O R D E R: This petition is filed to quash proceedings in C.C. No.153 of 2008 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Khammam. 2. A private complaint was filed against the petitioner/accused stating that some information, which the petitioner is required from the Gram Panchayat with regard to the properties owned by the complainant, is defamatory and put the image of the complainant under cloud in the society. Therefore, the private complaint has been filed. The Court has taken the complaint on file and questioning the same, the present petition is filed. 3. The point for consideration is whether there is abuse of process of law and whether the complaint is maintainable? 4. There is no dispute about the fact that the complainant and his wife have taken a loan from the National Small Industries Corporation Ltd., and the complainant is the guarantor for the said loan amount. It is also not in dispute that for non-payment of the said money, a suit O.S. No.2440 of 2006 was filed on the file of the City Civil Court at Chennai. 5. The purported defamatory letter is addressed to the Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Khanapuram, requesting to furnish particulars of the new house numbers for the old house No.6-2-10 and 6-2-31 and the other properties owned by them, since the property was given as security and as the money is not paid. Therefore, it is only information sought by the petitioner as a Legal Officer in discharge of his duties. The fact that the money was not paid by the date of this letter is not in dispute. The complaint also does not show that the loan was not taken and that the complainant was not the surety. The very fact that for non- payment of the loan amount a suit has been instituted clearly goes to show that the information sought by the petitioner is only for furtherance of the enforcement of the legal right against the complainant and his wife. It cannot be taken as defaming the complainant and consequently there is neither malice nor an intention to put the image of the complainant belittle him in the society. Therefore, from the material available on record, the alleged offence is not attracted. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no sworn statement was taken by the date of filing of the complaint and the case was taken on file even without a sworn statement. It is also an infirmity in taking cognizance of the case. 7. Therefore, for all the above reasons, either on fact or under law, the complaint is not maintainable and is accordingly quashed and the petition is allowed, as the continuation of the proceeding is abuse of process of law. _____________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J. Date: December 08, 2011. BSB