9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the permissibility of amending a complaint filed under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and the jurisdiction of the court where the alleged defamation took place. Amendment of Complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.: The respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner under Sections 120B, 499, and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for defamation. The complaint was later amended to include allegations related to a poem written by the petitioner. The Magistrate allowed the amendment before taking cognizance of the case. The petitioner argued that there is no provision in the Cr.P.C. for amending a complaint under Section 200 and that the Magistrate's actions were not justified. However, the court held that since the amendment was allowed before taking cognizance and no prejudice was caused to the petitioner, the Magistrate was justified in permitting the amendment. The court cited previous cases to support this decision, emphasizing that disallowing the amendment would lead to multiplicity of proceedings. Therefore, the petition to quash the proceedings based on the amendment was dismissed. Jurisdiction of the Court: The petitioner also argued that the alleged defamation took place in Mysore, so the complaint filed in Bangalore was not maintainable. However, the court referred to a previous case where it was held that if the act and consequence of harming reputation occur in a particular jurisdiction, that court has the jurisdiction to try the offense of defamation. Therefore, the court rejected the petitioner's argument regarding jurisdiction and upheld the proceedings in PCR No. 8409/2007 registered as C.C. No. 15851/2007 before the VII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
|
