J&K: High Court Quashes Defamation Case, Affirms Court Arguments Can Be Defamatory

A defamation complaint has been quashed by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. The order to this effect was given by Justice Sanjay Dhar

Srinagar (Jammu and Kashmir):The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed a defamation complaint filed by Syed Abid Jalali against Satya Prakash Arya, ruling that arguments made in court can be deemed defamatory. However, the court determined that the allegedly defamatory statements, made during judicial proceedings in Jaipur, fall outside its jurisdiction.

Jalali, a Kashmir-based businessman, accused Arya, a Jaipur-based businessman, of defamation during a bail hearing in Jaipur, Rajasthan. Jalali claimed Arya's counsel accused him of ties to the banned militant group Hizbul Mujahideen, leading to the rejection of his bail application and harming his reputation and business.

In his plea before the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Srinagar, Jalali stated that in 2013, he issued three cheques totalling Rs. 14 lakhs to settle liabilities, and an agreement was reached. Despite this, Arya filed a complaint in Jaipur, leading to an FIR and Jalali's detention. Arya's claim of unpaid jewellery led to damage to Jalali's reputation both in Goa, where he operates his business and in Jammu and Kashmir, where he resides and purchases Kashmiri handicrafts.

Jalali's petition also highlighted that Arya's counsel alleged his involvement with Hizbul Mujahideen during the bail hearing. This allegation was reported in newspapers. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) cleared Jalali of these claims in 2016, and he was granted bail by the Rajasthan High Court after six months in jail.

In 2017, Arya filed a criminal petition before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, arguing that the defamation case was invalid for two reasons. He claimed the allegations were made by the petitioner's lawyer without his advice and that the statements were made in Jaipur, not Jammu and Kashmir, thus excluding the Srinagar court's jurisdiction.

Justice Sanjay Dhar rejected Arya's first argument, affirming that defamatory arguments and pleadings before a court qualify as "publication" under Section 499 of the RPC.

"The law is established that pleadings with defamatory content when submitted to a court, qualify as publication under Section 499 of the RPC. Therefore, arguments made by a lawyer, even if inherently defamatory, can be grounds for prosecuting the client under Section 499 of the RPC," the court stated on July 20.

However, the High Court agreed with Arya that the defamation case could not be tried in Srinagar since the alleged offence occurred in Jaipur.

"The petitioner is a resident of Rajasthan and is alleged to have committed the offence of criminal defamation beyond the limits of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir; therefore, he cannot be prosecuted in Srinagar," the court said.

Justice Dhar ruled that the defamatory statements made in Jaipur were beyond the jurisdiction of the Srinagar court. The court noted that the media reports cited in the complaint were about court proceedings and NIA findings, not originating from Arya. As a result, the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Srinagar erred in accepting the complaint. The court has ordered that the complaint be returned to Jalali for filing in the appropriate jurisdiction, overturning the previous order from June 23, 2016.