1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1688 of 2009 Date of Decision: 10.11.2009 *** Ajaib Singh .. Petitioner Vs. Daljeet Singh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr.P.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner is aggrieved with order dated 19.3.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot, by dint of which respondent Daljeet Singh, who though was summoned by the learned Magistrate under Section 500 IPC, on a complaint preferred by the petitioner, has been discharge by allowing his revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner heard and paper book perused. This Court is of the considered view that no ground to interfere is made out. The learned Revisional Court below, finding the alleged imputation/ complaint made by the respondent as not defamatory, set aside the summoning order passed against the respondent. The operative part of order passed by revisional Court, reads as under:- “6. The allegations of the complainant are that the accused Daljeet Singh moved an application before the police that the complainant had obtained a passport under a fictitious name. Before the police authorities, the complainant explained his position that his name was Ajaib Singh and he was also known by the name of Jarnail Singh and the complaint was dropped. To my 2 mind, this information given by the accused before the police authorities or the other authorities is not a defamatory substance nor it lowers the reputation of the complainant in the eyes of his friends or relatives. He was not put to trial. He did not have to obtain anticipatory or regular bail and it will be unfair to hold that he has been defamed thereby in the eyes of his relatives or friends. The allegations of the complainant that the accused is in illegal and forcible possession of his (complainant's) land and is filing false complaints against the complainant and threatening that he will involve him in these complaints, are also frivolous and such like allegations do not form any defamatory substance.....” This Court is in total agreement with what has been observed by the learned revisional Court, as reproduced above, which rightly appreciated the evidence and circumstances of the case and finding the essential ingredients of Section 500 IPC conspicuously missing, rightly set aside the summoning order. There is no illegality or perversity in the approach adopted by the Court below. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE November 10,2009 Jiten