THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5161 of 2009 BETWEEEN: 1. Smt. K.Himabindu, W/o.K.Anand Kumar & 2 others. … Petitioners AND 1. The State of A.P. & another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5161 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners 1 to 3/A1, A3 and A4 who are wife, mother- in-law and brother-in-law of the 2nd respondent/complainant are accused of offence punishable under Section 500 I.P.C. in CC.No.362 of 2008 on the file of VI Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad along with five others. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that A1 as wife, gave report to the Women Police Station, Central Crime Station, Hyderabad in Crime No.14 of 2006 alleging offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. and others against the 2nd respondent and his family members and that after investigation, the Police filed charge sheet for the said offences before the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and that it is pending and as a counter blast for the said criminal case, the 2nd respondent filed the present defamation case against the petitioners and others who are witnesses in the case filed under Section 498-A I.P.C. and that it is nothing short of abuse of process of law. Even though portions of statements given by the witnesses in the case under Section 498-A I.P.C. referred in Para 7 of the complaint are stated to be privileged statements given by the witnesses during investigation to the Police officer having lawful authority to record the same, the 2nd respondent’s counsel clarified by saying that basis of the complaint of defamation is not the statements given by the accused herein to the Police, but the bad propaganda which the accused have been doing against him and his family in his office and other places and that those details are given in Para 9 of the complaint. The question whether exception No.7 to Section 494 I.P.C. is applicable or not, is one of fact as it relates to proof of good faith on the part of the person making the alleged defamatory statement. It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant and his family members have good respect among relatives, friends, community, colleagues and society and that since he did not accept the demands of A1 to A5, A1 to A8 have been making false propaganda against him and his parents’ among the relatives, friends, colleagues and society in order to defame them, making defamatory allegations mentioned in Para 7 of the complaint. Truth or otherwise of making the false propaganda as alleged by the complainant in the complaint is one of fact which has to be decided by the trial Court after recording evidence of both the parties. This Court in this petition cannot go into the said question and decide the same while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having regard to specific averment in the complaint that the accused and more particularly the petitioners are making bad propaganda against the 2nd respondent among relatives, friends, colleagues and society, it cannot be said that this is only a counter blast for the case under Section 498-A I.P.C. filed by A1 against the 2nd respondent and his family members. Therefore, I do not find any valid reasons to quash the proceedings in the lower Court. 2. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J Dated: 25.03.2011 ysk THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJUL CRIMINAL PETITION No.5161 of 2009 DATED: 25.03.2011 ysk