IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40790 of 2007 DEEPAK KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 3. 5.2.2010. I have heard Sri Chitranjan Sinha, senior counsel and also Smt. Namrata Mishra for the petitioner, Sri Pramod Mishra for the Opposite Party no.2-complainant and Sri D.Mehta, learned counsel for the A.P.P. The petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 18.1.2005 passed by the S.D.J.M., Saharsa in Complaint Case No.82(C)of 2004 by which he summoned the petitioner and others for allegedly committing the offence under Section 500 of the IPC. It appears that a letter bearing no.176 dated 24.1.2004 was issued by the petitioner in the capacity of being the Secretary of the Bihar State Electricity Board to the General Manager- cum-Chief Engineer, Kosi Electric Supply Region, Saharsa and another, by which he directed initiation of certain actions in the light of observations of a committee of the Public Sector Undertaking Units on certain irregularities which appeared to the committee in the transactions in respect of the work which had - 2 - been allotted to the petitioner’s father and his firm M/S General Electric Works, Saharsa. After receipt of the directions of the committee the matter was placed by the board before its standing counsel and opinion was obtained from him which appears indicated in paragraphs-1 and 2 of the above noted letter which is the part of the complaint petition on account of being mentioned in it and also being the basis for filing the complaint petition. The petitioner had only issued certain directions to the officers to whom the letter (Annexure-2)was addressed for initiating certain proceedings may also be in the form of a criminal case. I have gone through Annexure-2 and I find that there is no derogatory word, what to talk of a derogatory remarks used by the petitioner in the above letter while directing the initiation of appropriate actions against the father of the complainant and his two sons which includes the complainant. Section 499 defines the offence of defamation:- 499.Defamation.-Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, - 3 - or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.” On perusal of the complaint petition and its basis Annexure-2, I find that there is no words mentioned in it which could be said to be intending to harm or which could be said to be used knowingly or having reason to believe that such imputation would harm the reputation of complainant both as an individual or as an intellectual. I am of the opinion that the facts did not constitute the offence under which the petitioner and others were summoned. The very initiation of the proceedings through the impugned order appears a complete abuse of the process of law and as such the whole order is hereby quashed. The petition is allowed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )