Complaint under Sections 199/200 CrPC for defamation against wife
Cites the IPC, CrPC or Evidence Act. For matters from 1 July 2024, use the BNS, BNSS or BSA.
0 of 84 blanks filled
IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
INDEX
| S.No | Particulars | Page No. |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Memo of Parties |
| 2. | Complaint under Sections 199/200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for taking cognizance of, summoning, putting the Accused on trial and convicting the Accused for the commission of the offences under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for false imputation against the Complainant and thereby committing the offence of defamation |
| 3. | List of Documents along with documents |
| 4. | List of Witnesses |
| 5. | Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act |
| 6. | Vakalatnama on behalf of the Complainant |
Date: Date of filingComplainant
Through: Counsel's name
Place: Place of signing
Address line of complainant
Address line of complainant
Address line of complainant
IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
MEMO OF PARTIES
Complainant's address line
Complainant's address line
Complainant's address line
Complainant's name…Complainant
Versus
Accused's address line
Accused's address line
Accused's address line
R/o Accused's address,
Accused's name…Accused
Date: Date of filingComplainant
Through: Counsel's name
Place: Place of signing
Address line
Address line
Address line
Address line
IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 199/200 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 FOR TAKING COGNIZANCE OF, SUMMONING, PUTTING THE ACCUSED ON TRIAL AND CONVICTING THE ACCUSED FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 499 AND 500 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 FOR FALSE IMPUTATION AGAINST THE COMPLAINANT AND THEREBY COMMITTING THE OFFENCE OF DEFAMATION
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
The instant complaint is being filed by the Complainant against the Accused.
The facts leading to the filing of the instant complaint are as follows:
1.That the Complainant is a highly educated, law-abiding citizen of India and has full faith in the system of administration of justice. That, by dint of his endeavours and bona fide actions, the Complainant has earned credibility and goodwill among his social circle.
2.That the Complainant and the Accused are husband and wife and were married on Date of marriage. After the marriage, the Complainant and the Accused lived together and cohabited as husband and wife in their shared accommodation.
3.That the marriage between the parties was duly consummated and the parties lived and cohabited as husband and wife. From the said wedlock, the Complainant and the Accused were blessed with two sons, namely Elder son's name and Younger son's name.
4.That the elder son, Elder son's name, was born on Elder son's date of birth, and all the expenses towards his upbringing were borne by the Complainant. The younger son, Younger son's name, was born on Younger son's date of birth. It is pertinent to mention here that the Complainant has provided everything required for his children; however, the Accused was, from the very outset, obstinate and did not care for the children. It is further pertinent to mention that, despite several litigations pending between the Complainant and the Accused, the Complainant continues to bear the school fees of both children. It is also pertinent to mention that the Complainant does everything possible for his children, notwithstanding the fact that the Accused has not permitted him to meet his children.
5.That the Complainant and the Accused were living separately; the Complainant and his parents resided separately at Place of complainant's residence in Haryana, Haryana, with the elder brother of the Complainant. It is needful to mention here that the Accused has levelled numerous false and frivolous allegations and filed cases against the aged and ailing parents of the Complainant, who have never stayed with the Complainant and the Accused.
6.That the Complainant is highly qualified, possessing a B. Tech degree in Mechanical Engineering, and is working as an Associate at Name of complainant's employer at Location of complainant's employer, Haryana.
7.That the Complainant is a mechanical engineer with Number of years of complainant's experience years of experience in the Building Services Industry. He also has extensive experience in the design of plumbing and firefighting services in real estate. The Complainant is also a reputed and certified trainer from Green Plumbers India and is affiliated with the Institute of Engineers.
8.That the Complainant provided all the amenities required for setting up a household and leading a smooth life after moving to Delhi. The Complainant gave due care, love and affection to the Accused with utmost devotion and always fulfilled the demands of the Accused without any objection.
9.That the Complainant tried his level best to persuade the Accused to live peacefully with him and the children, but the Accused never paid any heed. In Month and year accused left for Mumbai and Pune, the Accused went to Mumbai and Pune, leaving behind two small children for a period of Number of days accused was away days. During the said period, the elder son of the Complainant, Elder son's name, contracted pneumonia, and the Accused did not return immediately despite being informed of the illness of their son.
10.That after the birth of the second son, namely Younger son's name, the Complainant was constrained to shift to Place complainant shifted to after second son's birth in the house of the Accused's maternal grandmother, as the in-laws of the Complainant were also staying nearby at Place where complainant's in-laws were staying. This was despite the fact that the school of the elder son, Elder son's name, was Distance of elder son's school in km km away from there.
11.That the Complainant tried everything within his reach to save his marriage, but nothing worked, and the Complainant was ultimately thrown out of his own house by the Accused.
12.The Complainant is essentially aggrieved by the irrational and erratic behaviour of the Accused.
13.That the Accused misappropriated a cheque belonging to the Complainant and presented the same after affixing a false and forged signature thereon. It is pertinent to mention here that the Accused maliciously forged the signatures of the Complainant and got the cheque dishonoured, in pursuance of which the Accused also filed a false and frivolous complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Hon'ble Court at Place of court where Section 138 NI Act complaint was filed on the ground of dishonour of a cheque allegedly given in lieu of payment of arrears of maintenance amount. It is needful to mention here that such malicious act of the Accused was duly reported by the Complainant to the police authorities by way of a written complaint. The copy of the police complaint and the reminder letter is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P1 (Colly.)
14.That the malevolent intentions of the Accused can further be deduced from the fact that the Accused has, time and again, changed her stance on the facts alleged by her in multiple cases. The changes and variations in her concocted stories elaborate the fact that the Accused is a habitual litigant with a tendency of levelling false, frivolous and baseless accusations in order to extort money from the Complainant as well as to defame the hard-earned reputation of the Complainant.
15.That the above-mentioned tendencies of mala fide on the part of the Accused can be distinctly seen from the cross-examination of the Accused in the pending case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, pending adjudication before the Ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Saket, New Delhi. The excerpts from the cross-examination dated Date of cross-examination are reproduced hereinunder for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court;
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE COMPLAINANT (CONTD.)
“Q. Have you sent any legal notice to the Accused regarding the cheque bounce?
Ans. Yes, I have sent a legal notice in respect of the cheque bounce amounting to Amount of the bounced cheque towards arrears of maintenance. The cheque was delivered by a person at my home at a time when I was not present and only my sons were at home, and the same was delivered after Time of cheque delivery. As I was attending a religious congregation until Date until which the Complainant was away at the congregation, I learnt of the cheque only on the following day after returning home. I was at the religious congregation for approximately Approximate duration of the congregation. I did not make any call to the Accused regarding the cheque, as he has not been responding to my calls/emails for the last Number of months the Accused did not respond to calls/emails months.”
“Q. Who gave you the first information that the cheque allegedly towards arrears amounting to Amount of the bounced cheque had been given?
Ans. On Date of cheque delivery, both my children were alone at home, and my younger son opened the door. There was a person who was enquiring about me, and that person put/dropped the cheque in an envelope from beneath the door.”
It is submitted that the above two answers demonstrate how the Accused is in the habit of shifting her stance: on the one hand she deposes that the alleged cheque was delivered to her, while on the other hand, deposing on the very same day, she states that someone inserted the cheque beneath the door of her house in her absence.
The certified copy of the cross-examination in M. No. Maintenance case number, pending adjudication before the Ld. PJFC, Saket Courts, New Delhi, is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-2.
16.That the Complainant is presently working at Name of the Complainant's employer at Place of the Complainant's employment, and has worked tirelessly towards attaining his post and reputation in view of his professional and personal contacts, and had every hope of maintaining the same through continuous and diligent endeavours.
17.That the Complainant has been an employee with a satisfactory record of performance and character, has had no internal issues in the company, and has never been called upon by the Human Resources Department in respect of any untoward issue or matter.
18.That the wife of the Complainant, namely the Accused, Accused's name, through her email id Accused's email address, sent several derogatory and threatening emails to the Complainant and to his office email id HR department email address (HR Department), tagging all the heads and directors of the company where the Complainant works in copy of the false and frivolous mails. The said emails were sent not only to the present office of the Complainant but also to his previous office, containing malicious allegations against the Complainant.
19.That the wife of the Complainant, namely the Accused, wrote an email on Date of email at around Time of email from her email id, i.e. Accused's email address, to the email id of the Complainant, Complainant's email address, and the said email was received by the Complainant at his home at Time of receipt of email. As the Complainant was working from home owing to the lockdown, the mails were also sent to the HR of the Complainant's company, where he is working as an employee, keeping HR officer's name in copy at his email address on Date of email to HR, containing inflammatory and defamatory content, which is reproduced herein for the perusal of the Hon'ble Court:-
“I would like to bring to your kind knowledge that Complainant's name, who is working in your company as an Complainant's designation in the company, has been living apart from his family for the last Duration of separation from family years. We have completed Duration of the marriage of our arranged marriage and we have Number of children from our wedlock, and I am the only person who has been taking care of them for the last Duration for which the Accused solely cared for the children years as a single parent.
The reason I am writing this email to you is that Complainant's name is harassing me and my children mentally, socially and financially. He is neither following the court's directions nor responding to the mails.
The reason behind this separation is his extra-marital affairs with his colleagues. Not only this, he has cheated his previous organisation by undertaking their projects unofficially with the help of bribes.”
I am his wife, and he was therefore routing all the money into my accounts.
On the ground of bribery and his malafide intentions, his previous company forced him to resign.
At present, he is undergoing Number of pending litigations litigations, wherein he and his family members are on bail in two criminal cases, namely:
•Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC for the children
•Execution proceedings exceeding Amount involved in execution proceedings
•Case under Section 498A IPC (dowry case), in which he and his family are on bail
•Case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, involving a cheque amount of Amount of the bounced cheque, in which he is on bail
•Child custody proceedings
•Domestic violence proceedings
•Suit for recovery and partition of property
•Suit for injunction
He is not abiding by the court orders honestly, and I am therefore constrained to inform you all, because his conduct of this kind is affecting my children's day-to-day life and their future. …. She further wrote in the same email …
On humanitarian grounds, it is indeed strange that a person who is not capable of keeping his children happy, or of paying for their expenses, can be a loyal person to his company.
A person who cannot manage his own family's social image — how can a company think that he will be able to handle its image in the market?
For my children and me, he is a source of constant distress.
I shall be extremely thankful if you will do the needful for my two minor children.”
20.That the said email dated Date of email was sent to the email id of the Complainant and to the HR of his company, bearing the subject “Subject line of email Payment request and awareness letter”. The said mail was sent by the Accused alleging that she used to receive money in her accounts in respect of the alleged bribery claims that she has accused the Complainant of in his previous employment.
21.That the Accused further stated in the email sent on Date of email that “on the grounds of bribery and his malafide intentions, his previous company forced him to resign”. It is pertinent to note that allegations as serious as bribery and misdemeanour have been levelled against the Complainant without any actual or concrete evidence.
22.That the contents of the email dated Date of email are defamatory and malicious in nature. The contents are directly aimed at tarnishing the image of the Complainant. The Complainant is a professional in his field, having been working in the engineering field for Complainant's years of professional experience years of relevant experience.
23.That it is humbly submitted that the facts alleged by the Accused in the said emails are utterly false and were aimed at causing hurt to the standing that the Complainant had earned through years of hard work. The Complainant is filing the copies of the emails along with the certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act, and further reserves the right to file additional documents against the Accused as and when directed, and also reserves the right to initiate appropriate civil and criminal proceedings against the Accused before the competent courts.
24.That it is important to appreciate that it takes years for a person to establish his mark in any field of work. The accusations levelled against the Complainant would deal a severe blow to his professional life. The said accusations are false and frivolous in nature.
25.That the said allegations are of so serious a nature that any person of ordinary prudence would begin to question the character of the Complainant, and consequently the assassination of his character at the workplace would already have commenced.
26.That every individual, irrespective of the litigations in which he or she may be involved, has a right to work and earn his livelihood with reputation. The contents of the email have pinpointed certain aspects of the personal life of the Complainant which play no role whatsoever in determining his professional capabilities and credibility. The entire narrative has been fully concocted to show the Complainant in a bad light.
27.That the said email has also sought to portray the Complainant as a person in default of law, which is highly objectionable on the part of the Accused, inasmuch as the Complainant is a peace-loving and law-abiding citizen of India and has never been on the wrong side of the law.
28.That the Complainant and the Accused have several litigations pending against each other in various courts of Courts location where litigations are pending.
29.That FIR No. FIR number was registered at P.S. Police station name and location on the instance of Accused No. 2 against the Complainant and his family members under Sections 498A/406 IPC. The said case is at the stage of prosecution evidence and is listed next on Next date of hearing before the Hon'ble District Court at District court location. It is pertinent to note that neither the Complainant nor his family members were ever arrested by the Investigating Officer in the said case, and the Complainant was granted anticipatory bail therein.
30.That a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was also filed against the Complainant by the Accused before the trial court seeking maintenance. The next date of hearing in the said matter was Next date of hearing in maintenance petition, and owing to the prevailing pandemic situation, the actual next date of hearing is not known at present.
31.That a complaint case under Section 12 of the D.V. Act has also been filed against the Complainant, in which the next date of hearing is Next date of hearing in maintenance case.
32.That a complaint under Sections 138/142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has also been filed by the Accused against the Complainant, in which the next date of hearing was Next date of hearing in cheque bounce case, and the actual next date of hearing is unknown at present owing to the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic situation.
33.That in addition to the aforesaid litigations, the custody battle relating to the two children born out of the wedlock of the Complainant and the Accused is also pending, and numerous other applications have been filed by both parties against each other.
34.That on Date of email, the Accused sent an email to HR officer's name, who handles the Human Resources Department of the company where the Complainant is working as Complainant's designation in the company. The said email contained maligning content intended to harm the character of the Complainant. All the details mentioned in the email pertain to the personal details of the Complainant and the Accused, which form part and parcel of the ongoing litigations and are under the adjudication of the Hon'ble trial court.
35.That the email dated Date of email sent by the Accused also purported to direct the present employer company to deduct an amount of Salary deduction amount (₹)/- from the salary of the Complainant and remit the same to the Accused, which is an absurd and unlawful demand.
36.That in her email dated Date of email, the Accused also sought to portray the Complainant as a person incapable of working in the company. The statement reads as: "A person who can't manage his own family's image socially than how can a company thinks he will be able to handle their image in market."
37.That in her email, the Accused referred to the Complainant by names such as "First insulting name used by the Accused" and "Second insulting name used by the Accused".
38.That HR officer's name, the HR officer of the company where the Complainant works, sent a reply to the aforesaid email of the Accused from his email ID, HR officer's email ID, at around Time of reply email, stating: "As per the company policy, we do not comment/interfere on the personal matters of our employees." As the matter is sub judice, it is for the respective courts to issue directions in the matter as deemed appropriate.
39.That owing to the aforesaid malicious and criminally intended acts of the Accused, the Complainant has become a subject of gossip and ridicule among the staff of the office premises. That the Accused has projected the Complainant as a careless father, but the truth is contrary thereto, as detailed and discussed in the paragraphs above.
40.That despite receiving the aforesaid reply from the company of the Complainant, the Accused did not desist from her illegitimate acts of harassing and defaming the Complainant and maligning his image. She again sent an email to the company of the Complainant, and this time crossed all limits, as she not only sent the email to the HR officer, HR officer's name, but also to the head officers and directors of the company at Location of company's head office and in India, at their respective email IDs. On Date of email at around Time of email, the Accused again wrote an email from her email ID, i.e., Accused's email address, and threatened the head officers and directors of the company where the Complainant is working by stating: 'Complainant's name's supporters will be admissible in court u/s 120B.' The Accused sent the above email to the following email IDs of the directors of the company:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.Director's email address
i.
j.
k.
l.Director's email address
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
r.
s.
Further, in the above email dated Date of email, the Accused asked Officer asked to share HR policies to share their HR policies, referring to the Complainant as "those employees who booked criminal cases for themselves and on leave for 15 days in month because of their personal litigation". Such statements are derogatory and inquisitive in nature and are capable of creating a misconception in the eyes of the employer of the Complainant. That copies of the above emails dated Date of email, Date of email and Date of email are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P3 to P5.
41.That on the same day, i.e., on Date of management decision, the top-level management conveyed their decision to the Complainant telephonically that he should speak to the Accused and request her not to send such emails to them, failing which they would have to take the matter in the utmost serious manner. The Complainant somehow tried to make them understand the nature of the Accused and her efforts to entrap the Complainant, and further apprised the management that he already had a restraining order from the Court that granted the restraining order to the effect that the Accused could not interfere at the workplace of the Complainant, whereupon the management asked him to convey the same by email. Accordingly, the Complainant sent an email from his email ID on Date of email at around Time of email pm to all the email IDs mentioned above, to which the Accused had sent the threatening and defamatory email, and requested the company not to reply to the emails of the Accused. A copy of the email dated Date of email sent by the Complainant is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P6.
42.That it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon'ble Civil Judge, Court that granted the restraining order, vide order dated Date of civil court order, had categorically restrained the Accused from interfering with or visiting the workplace of the Complainant. However, the Accused has chosen not to abide by the orders of the Hon'ble Court and has continuously approached the workplace by emails containing derogatory remarks, for which the Accused is also liable to be prosecuted for contempt of court. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced herein for the perusal of this Hon'ble Court:
"in view of the categorical submissions made by Accussed no. 1 and 2, the stay application is disposed of with direction that they would not visit or disturb the Complainant's either at their work place, residence or in the shop till the final decision of the suit."
A copy of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court at Court that granted the restraining order is annexed herewith as Annexure P7.
43.That the plight of the Complainant did not end here. The Accused, with malicious intentions, again sent an email dated Date of email to the Complainant, in which she copied all the HR managers, and the Complainant received the same at his residence at Complainant's residential address. The email sent by the Accused clearly demonstrates her intention to defame the Complainant at his workplace as well as before his friends and relatives by showing them the alleged messages from the school authorities. The relevant portion of the email is reproduced herein for the perusal of this Hon'ble Court:
“I am going to show these things not only to your office colleagues but also to all your relatives by appearing with the police in person at their doorstep.”
The copy of the email dated Date of email is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-8.
44.That the Complainant is himself facing hardship on account of the Covid-19 pandemic, while the Accused has been creating numerous problems in the life of the Complainant by sending false and frivolous emails and by filing false cases, including a false complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act. It is also pertinent to mention here that the maintenance of the Accused was stopped by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saket, Delhi, which demonstrates the conduct of the Accused, who has deliberately and repeatedly attempted, with evil motive, to trap the Complainant.
45.That the emails sent by the Accused were targeted principally at bringing shame upon the name of the Complainant and were made in the absence of any cause of action whatsoever.
46.That it is humbly submitted that the facts alleged by the Accused in the said complaint are utterly false and were aimed at causing injury to the standing which the Complainant had earned through years of hard work.
47.That it is humbly submitted that the Accused has blown the facts out of proportion and has maliciously targeted the Complainant out of a certain subtle and undisclosed grudge, in order to malign his image and to achieve character assassination by lowering his prestige and maliciously entangling his name.
48.That the Accused has caused immense damage to, and tarnished, the reputation of the Complainant with ulterior motives calculated to defame him and to cause disrepute to him in society and amongst the public at large, by filing the aforesaid complaint containing defamatory statements in a highly reckless manner.
49.That the said imputations were false, defamatory in nature and lacking in good faith. They were made maliciously and with utter recklessness, where the Accused had knowledge, or reason to believe, that they were untrue and absolutely without foundation, and that they would harm the reputation of the Complainant — and in fact did lower his reputation — in the estimation of business colleagues, members of the public at large and right-thinking members of society. The said imputations were made by the Accused without verifying their correctness, and were devoid of the due care, attention and inquiry which she was enjoined to exercise but wilfully failed to do so. The said imputations lacked honesty of purpose and were made to harm the reputation of the Complainant, there being a conscious violation of law, the Accused acting without any sense of responsibility, prudence, propriety, care and caution. To say the least, the said imputations were totally irresponsible and actuated by ill-will, malice, improper motive and collateral considerations.
50.That the said imputations lacked honesty of purpose and were made to harm the reputation of the Complainant, there being a conscious violation of law, the Accused acting without any sense of responsibility, prudence, propriety, care and caution. To say the least, the said imputations were totally irresponsible and actuated by ill-will, malice, improper motive and collateral considerations.
51.That it is submitted that, subsequent to the acts of the Accused against the Complainant by levelling false accusations, the Accused has caused severe injury to the reputation of the Complainant.
52.That the Accused deliberately levelled false allegations against the Complainant in order to tarnish his image in society at large. The Accused is further threatening the Complainant with sending various false emails to the friends of the Complainant so as to defame him.
53.That the said defamatory allegations are sufficient to lower the image of the Complainant in the eyes of society and the general public at large, and the same have been deliberately placed before the Hon'ble Court and thereafter circulated amongst the common friends of the Complainant so as to enable various persons to read the defamatory contents thereof, which contain, besides other false, fabricated and defamatory allegations, certain relevant portions couched in language of the utmost defamatory character.
54.That owing to the aforesaid false allegations placed by the Accused before the Court as well as communicated to the public at large, the Complainant has been put to considerable embarrassment in society and at his workplace.
55.That the allegations put forward by the Accused in the application state that the aforesaid allegations have created a stir in the friends' circle of the Complainant.
56.That the Accused intentionally committed the said act in order to insult the Complainant and to cause damage to the reputation and goodwill of the Complainant and his family.
57.That the Complainant respectfully further states that the allegations levelled by the Accused are false, mischievous, groundless, fictional, imaginary, fabricated, concocted and defamatory per se.
58.That the Complainant further submits that the Accused has caused immense damage and tarnished his reputation and cast aspersions upon his character with ulterior motives calculated to defame him and cause disrepute to him in the eyes of society and the public at large, by making the aforesaid defamatory statements in a highly reckless manner.
59.That the Complainant further submits that the allegations of unhealthy behaviour and those relating to the personal life of the Complainant, as levelled by the Accused, contain utterly false, scurrilous, derogatory, disparaging, slanderous and highly per se defamatory statements, which are unsubstantiated by cogent and irrefutable evidence. The Complainant further states that those contents have been made by the Accused simply to defame, derogate and humiliate the Complainant and his family amongst her social circle and in society at large, out of a certain grudge, envy and jealousy, with a dishonest, malicious and mischievous intention to cause wrongful loss to the Complainant, to lower his reputation and to tarnish the goodwill of the Complainant and his family in society, both domestically and overseas.
60.That the Complainant respectfully further states that the allegations levelled by the Accused are false, mischievous, groundless, fictional, imaginary, fabricated, concocted and defamatory per se.
61.That this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present Complaint, as the Complainant resides within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.
62.That the said imputations were thus false, defamatory in nature and lacking in good faith. They were made maliciously and with utter recklessness by the Accused, who had apparent reason to believe that they were untrue and absolutely without foundation, and that they would harm and lower the reputation of the Complainant; and the said imputations in fact lowered the goodwill of the Complainant in the estimation of business colleagues, members of the public at large and right-thinking members of society. The said imputations were made by the Accused without verifying their correctness, and were devoid of the due care, attention and inquiry which she was enjoined to exercise but wilfully failed to do so. The said imputations lacked honesty of purpose and were made to harm the reputation of the Complainant, there being a conscious violation of law, the Accused acting without any sense of responsibility, prudence, propriety, care and caution. To say the least, the said imputations were irresponsible and actuated by ill-will, malice, improper motive and collateral considerations.
63.That owing to the said imputations, and their communication and dissemination, the prestige, credit and reputation of the Complainant have been grossly undermined, jeopardised and damaged, causing him to be regarded with feelings of hatred, contempt, ridicule, derision, dislike, disgrace and disesteem amongst members of society, the community and the public. The said imputations have also injured the feelings of the Complainant and his family members, causing the Complainant to suffer mental anguish, distress and trauma.
64.That it is needless to state that the right to reputation is a facet of the right to life of the Complainant under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Reputation is not merely the salt of life, but also the purest treasure and the most precious perfume of life; it is an extremely delicate and cherished value this side of the grave, and it is a revenue generator for the present as well as for posterity.
65.That by making such false imputations, the Accused has sought to ruin the future prospects of success that the Complainant had. The Accused has acted in a grossly callous manner and has caused a severe assassination of the character of the Complainant.
66.That the act of the Accused has caused valuable damage to the reputation of the Complainant. This act of the Accused is deliberate, done with an ulterior motive, and is well planned solely to defame the Complainant and harm his reputation and that of his family in society and before the public at large.
67.That the said allegations were made with utter recklessness, and any person other than the Accused would infer that they were made only to defame, denigrate and slander the Complainant and to adversely affect his respect, prestige and standing amongst his segment of society, his social circles, friends, relatives, colleagues, associates and members of the public at large, including right-thinking members of society.
68.That all the allegations levelled by the Accused against the Complainant were made only to damage the reputation of the Complainant, and this deliberate act of the Accused has caused great loss to the Complainant.
69.That the Accused, with an ulterior motive and mala fide intention, deliberately damaged the reputation of the Complainant. It is pertinent to note that the imputations made by the Accused and his actions clearly signify that he was reasonably aware that his conduct would cause harm to the reputation of the Complainant and would gravely endanger his occupation.
70.That none of the false accusations made by the Accused in his complaint or before the other residents were made in good faith, and hence the Accused is liable to be penalised.
71.That it is needful to mention that the burden of proving that the email sent by the Accused was made in good faith lies upon the Accused alone. It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that the factum of the complaint does not permit a definitive conclusion that the same was made in any good faith whatsoever.
72.That the intentional insult and imputation made by the Accused was made with full knowledge and intention, knowing fully well that the same was likely to cause hatred in the minds of people against the Complainant and his family.
73.That the false allegations and insinuations made by the Accused in the aforesaid allegations have lowered the Complainant and his family in the estimation of the public at large, and people have begun to avoid and shun the company of the Complainant and his family.
74.That the aforesaid false aspersions cast by the Accused upon the Complainant have disparaged the esteem and dignity of the Complainant among the right-thinking people of society.
75.That the said defamatory contents of the email have the sole objective of causing damage to the reputation and goodwill of the Complainant, which he had earned manifold over the last Duration of the Complainant's professional career of his professional career. In one of its landmark judgments, the Apex Court quoted a passage from the 'Mahabharat' to explain the importance of 'reputation' in a man's life.
In Kiran Bedi and Jinder Singh Vs. Committee of Inquiry AIR 1989 SC 714, it was held as under:
The following words of caution uttered by Lord Arjun in the Bhagwat Geeta with regard to dishonour or loss of reputation may usefully be quoted:
"Akirtim chapi bhutani kathayishyanti teavyayam,
Sambhavitasya chakirtir maranad atirichyate"
(Men will recount thy perpetual dishonour, and to one highly esteemed, dishonour exceedeth death)
76.That the Complainant also filed an application seeking a direction from the Hon'ble Principal Judge to restrain the Accused from sending any emails or messages to the Employer or other members of the management at his workplace, and the same is pending adjudication before the Ld. Principal Judge, Family Courts, Place of the Family Court where the pending application is filed.
77.That the Complainant reserves his right to pursue other appropriate legal remedies, in addition to filing the present complaint.
78.That all the allegations levelled by the Accused against the Complainant were made only to damage the reputation of the Complainant, and this deliberate act of the Accused has caused great loss to the Complainant.
79.That a two-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment in the matter titled "Subramanium Swamy vs Union of India, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 184 of 2014", upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 499 to 502Closing bracket (part of citation)] of the Indian Penal Code relating to criminal defamation. The Bench, comprising Justices Dipak Misra and P.C. Pant, held that the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to reputation. The Bench observed: "reputations cannot be allowed to be sullied on the anvils of free speech, as free speech is not absolute. Right of life and freedom of speech have to be mutually respected."
80.That this is not the first occasion on which the Accused has sought to defame the Complainant before his employers; she has done the same act in the past as well, when the Accused sent a false, frivolous and malicious email to the immediate boss of the Complainant along with all the higher officials, in which she alleged that the Complainant was a person of bad character, among other things.
81.That the emails dated Date of email, Date of email and Date of email, and the other emails sent by the Accused and the other officials, were received by the Complainant at his home, and as the Complainant resides within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court, and inasmuch as the publication of defamatory material against a person gives rise to a cause of action only when it is made known to a third party, and the place of the third party and the place where it is known to a third party gain importance, this Hon'ble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
82.That the Accused has thus committed the offence of defamation as defined under Section 499 read with Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
83.That the Accused knowingly made imputations concerning the Complainant, intending to harm the reputation of the Complainant and well knowing that such imputations would harm his reputation; as such, the Accused is liable to be prosecuted under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
84.That the Accused has knowingly made such severe and baseless imputations concerning the Complainant, intending to disrepute the Complainant, with the full knowledge that such assertions would cause gross and severe harm to his reputation; as such, the Accused is liable to be prosecuted under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
85.That even though the kind of damage that the actions and imputations of the Accused have caused to the reputation and hard-earned goodwill of the Complainant cannot be compensated in terms of money, the Complainant reserves his right to pursue other appropriate legal remedies, in addition to filing the present complaint.
86.That the Complainant has filed a list of all the relevant documents which are in the power and possession of the Complainant, and seeks liberty to file such other documents as may be found necessary at subsequent stages of the proceedings.
87.That the Complainant has filed a list of probable witnesses and reserves the right to file an additional list of witnesses, if found necessary, during the course of these proceedings.
PRAYER
In light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(a)To take cognizance of the present complaint against the Accused for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; and/or
(b)To issue process against the Accused for the commission of the said offence; and/or
(c)To pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATEDCOUNSEL
.
VERIFICATION : -
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of Month of verification. That the contents of the above Complaint are true and correct to my knowledge, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
COMPLAINANT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO.Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
AFFIDAVIT
I, Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Shri Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's house number, Deponent's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That I am the Complainant in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying complaint of the Complainant have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION : -
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of Month of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO.Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
| S. No. | PARTICULARS | PAGE NO. |
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATEDCOUNSEL
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO.Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
LIST OF WITNESSES
| S. No. | PARTICULARS | PAGE NO. |
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATEDCOUNSEL
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SOUTH DISTRICT AT SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO.Complaint number/Complaint year
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Accused's name…ACCUSED
CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 65B OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
1.I, Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Shri Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's house number, Deponent's address, do hereby state as under:
2.I state that all the emails were printed from the computer while it was in my possession and was being regularly used to store, print and retrieve the details.
3.I state that the computer from which the emails sent to the Complainant were printed remains in my custody, and I have lawful control over the same. The computer used for taking the printouts was, at the relevant time, operating properly, and nothing was observed so as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents. The said details were in the form of an electronic record and were regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of activities. The process of taking a printout from the computer involves retrieving the data and giving a print command to print the same; thus, the data was printed directly, and the only human intervention was the giving of the print command.
4.In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Certificate may be treated as sufficient compliance with the requirements of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
DATE:
PLACE:
COMPLAINANT