THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1060 of 2001 JUDGMENT: The petitioner herein filed a private complaint against the first respondent herein alleging the offence punishable under Section 500 I.P.C. The Court below having perused the averments of the complainant in the sworn statement came to the conclusion that no offence was made out against the first respondent and accordingly dismissed the complaint by docket order dated 12.07.2001. The same is questioned in this criminal revision case filed under Section 397 (1) and 401 Cr.P.C. The case of the complainant, who is a business man and carrying on poultry business, is that though there was no debt or liability to the first respondent, the first respondent created accounts and filed a suit in O.S.No.450 of 2000 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle contending that the complainant is indebted heavily and creditors are pressuring him; that the complainant has no other properties except the poultry and that the complainant is taking steps to sell away the property to defraud the creditors, and accordingly obtained ex parte order of attachment in I.A.No.2048 of 2000 on 31.12.2000. In pursuance of the said order, the first respondent caused beat of tam-tam at the business place of the complainant and thereby caused loss to his reputation, though he expressed his intention to deposit the amount in the Court below under protest. The complainant deposited the suit claim with interest through fixed deposit in SPL/6/0057746 dated 15.01.2001 for Rs.1,00,000/- and filed an application in I.A.No.6881 of 2001 to raise the attachment. Though the first respondent was having full knowledge that the complainant is having substantial movable and immovable properties, with a malice intention he made a publication on 17.01.2001 in “Eenadu” Telugu Daily of Anakapalle Rural Edition and caused loss to the reputation of the complainant. Hence, the complainant filed the above complaint and the same was dismissed as stated supra. Heard. Having considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perusing the record, this Court is of the view that the offence, as alleged by the complainant to attract the provisions under Section 500 I.P.C., was not made out. Further the alleged offence, even according to the complainant, was by way of publication in “Eenadu” Telugu Daily of Anakapalle Rural Edition on 17.01.2001. In the light of the above, I see no grounds to interfere with the docket order dated 12.07.2001 and the Criminal Revision Case is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J Date: 22.07.2010 va