Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/2664/2010 of RAMESH KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Vs NIRUPAM BAJPAI on 5 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKEON THE 5[th] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2664 of 2010
BETWEEN:-
RAMESH KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA S/O S/O LT.BALALPRASAD SHRIVASTAVA , AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,OCCUPATION: GOVT.SERVICE SR.PROFESSOR,R/O147/28 RAMASHRAYA HANUMANCOLONY,A.B.ROAD,GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(none)
.....APPLICANT
ANDNIRUPAM BAJPAI S/O , AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,OCCUPATION: REPORTING,R/O SHASTRI COLONYINFRONT OF PARK,GOPAL JI SAXENA KAMAKAN,GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(none)
.....RESPONDENTS
This application coming on for direction this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present petition u/s. 482 of Cr.P.C arises out of order dated8.3.2010 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna, whereby thecomplaint u/s. 500 of IPC for holding the present respondent guilty fordefamation was rejected by the Court.
Learned Trial Court after due appreciation of material available on recordand the evidence adduced therein has found that there is no sum and substancein the complaint and ingredients of Sections 499 and 500 of IPC are not attracted and accordingly has dismissed the said complaint.
After perusing the impugned order and going through the materialavailable on record, this Court does not find any perversity or illegalitycommitted by the Court below in acquitting the present respondent of thecharges u/s. 500 of IPC and therefore this Court holds that the order impugnedsince does not suffer from any perversity or illegality, has rightly been passed.
Accordingly, there is no merit in the present petition, therefore the sameis hereby dismissed.
ar
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)JUDGE