Kolkata: Observing that if the moral or intellectual character of the aggrieved person is not lowered in the estimation of other persons, making of the imputation cannot per se lead to commission of the offence of defamation, Calcutta High Court quashed a case against petitioners who made allegations against the superintendent of an educational institution.
The bench of Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta was moved by the petitioners against whom the complainant (superintendent of the institution) brought charges of defamation, criminal intimidation and criminal conspiracy. The matter pertained to a branch of an educational institution which was said to have been started by a freedom fighter. The petitioners, who are locals of the village with contributions to the school, alleged that since the complainant took charge as the super, he was compelling students to attend political meetings by closing the school and misappropriating money/property of the institution, among other illegal activities.
They also wrote to the Chief Minister and Minister of Technical Education Department. An inquiry was initiated.
In counter to their mass deputation, another deputation was made to the state by the school authorities in support of the complainant.
The court observed there was no substance in the allegations levelled by the petitioners and many who signed the deputations later deposed their signatures were forged.
However, the court observed that the case falls under an exception clause of defamation which states it is not defamation if accusation is made in good faith to a person who has lawful authority over the accuser.
Court observed that the petition was submitted to the appropriate authorities in exercise of their legal and natural rights, and it was done confidentially. It cannot be construed as malice and imputation of reputation in public or society.
Qualified privilege is when anyone makes any statement in a good intention and without the intent to defame. In such cases, the statement does not constitute an offence punishable under Section 500 IPC (defamation punishment), the court observed.