1 CriA-2723-06.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2723 OF 2006 Sayed Siraj Azar Abdul .. Petitioner Vs. Mrs. Sana Yusuf Baugwala & Ors. Respondents Mr. Harshad Bhadbhade i/b. Imtiyaz G. Patel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sana Yusuf Baugwala Advocate for the respondent No.1 present in Court. Mr. Manoj S. Mohite, i/b. Rohit V. Pawaskar,Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 8th July, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The application is filed by the original accused No.1 against issuance of process for the offence punishable under Sec. 500 IPC. 3. To state in brief, "Anjuman Faizan-E-Bahauddin Asfahani" Committee is a registered Trust. The applicant was President of the said Committee. Respondent No.2, who is complainant No.2, was a General Secretary of the Committee. By a resolution dated 4.11.2001, the respondent No.2 was expelled from the post of General Secretary on different grounds stated in the said resolution. In ground (i), it was stated that the respondent No.1 wife of respondent 2 CriA-2723-06.sxw No.2 used to take addresses and phone numbers of the devotees, supply same to the gundas of underworld for extortion creating law and order condition at the Dargah. Having passed that resolution, on 5.11.2001, a letter was addressed to the Deputy Charity Commissioner by the present applicant and other members of the Trust wherein the resolution was reproduced. In view of the above referred statement, made in the resolution and the letter, a complaint was filed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sec. 500 IPC against some persons, including the present applicant. The learned Magistrate issued process for the offence punishable under Sec.500. That order was challenged in a Revision Application before the Sessions Court. That Revision Application was rejected. Therefore, this Application is filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. 4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusal of the said resolution as well as the letter dated 5.11.2001, the alleged imputation in ground (i) in the resolution appears to be perse defamatory. The said resolution was sent to the Deputy Charity Commissioner in the form of letter dated 5.11.2001. Naturally, the Deputy Charity Commissioner and the concerned members of his staff had an opportunity to read the same and thus there was a publication of the alleged defamatory statement. Whether the case falls under any exception or not can be decided only after the trial. The burden lies on the 3 CriA-2723-06.sxw accused persons to prove that the alleged defamatory imputation or the statement was true and was for the protection of the interest of the public at large or that the case was covered by any of the exceptions to Sec. 499. At this stage, this Court cannot take a decision in that respect and that has to be left to the trial court and it can be done only during trial of the case. Prima facie, I find no substance to interfere in the impugned order to issue process under Sec. 500 IPC. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the Application stands rejected. 6. It is reported that the complaint is pending since the year 2002, but because of the earlier revision application and this application, there has been no progress in the matter. Therefore, the trial Court shall expedite the hearing and dispose of the complaint as early as possible and preferably within six months. 7. The trial Court shall not be influenced by any observations made in this order while deciding the complaint on its merits. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)