1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Criminal Revision Application No.662 of 2007 Suresh Chunilal Shah Applicant Vs. Vasant ganeshmal Oswal & ors. Respondents Mr.V.N.Mali for applicant. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP for State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE,J. July 31, 2008 P.C. . Heard Mr.Mali, the learned counsel for the applicant who has filed Criminal Case No.78 of 2006 for the offence punishable under Section 500 read with Section 34 of IPC against the nine accused who are impleaded as present respondent Nos.1 to 9. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Pali by his order dated 11/7/2006 ordered issuance of process against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 500 read with Section 34 of IPC and the said order came to be challenged in Criminal Revision 2 Application No.84 of 2006 by accused nos.1 and 2. The learned Sessions Judge at Alibaug was pleased to allow the revision vide his judgment and order dated 1/11/2007 and hence this revision application by the complainant. . At the first instance it must be made clear that the revision was filed only by the accused nos.1 and 2 and it has been allowed only against the process issued against the said two accused. Remaining accused are not necessary parties before this Court. . I have perused the complaint filed by the applicant and the learned Sessions Judge is right in his findings that against accused no.2 there is absolutely nothing even to make out a prima facie case of an offence of defamation within the meaning of Section 499 of IPC. In para 4 of the complaint, the complainant states that on 19/6/2005 in the Annual General Body Meeting of the Public Trust viz. the Sudhagad Education Society, the accused nos. 1 and 2 had brought persons who were not members of the Trust and the complainant had announced his candidature but the accused nos.1 and 2, in collusion and by way of conspiracy with accused nos.3 to 8, levelled charges 3 of misappropriation so as to defame the complainant. In addition accused no.1 also made a speech. . The speech allegedly made by the accused no.1 and which was minuted in the Minutes of Book of the Public Trust has been reproduced in para 12 of the complaint. As per the complainant he was the Vice President of the trust whereas Shri Dadasaheb Limaye was the President. Undoubtedly accused nos.1 to 9 are also the Trustees of the said Trust and the members of the managing committee. The third exception below Section 499 states that it is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of any person touching any public question, and respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further. The speech made by the accused no.1 and recorded in the Minutes of the Annual General Body meeting held on 19/6/2005 is the expression of the opinion regarding the governance of the Public Trust and more particularly the conduct and the character of the complainant in respect of the administration of the said Trust and in his capacity as the Vice President. Prima facie, therefore, there was no triable case made out even against the accused no.1 and the learned 4 Sessions Judge was right in setting aside the order of issuance of process. . Hence the revision fails and the same is hereby rejected.