The Excessive Court docket famous that Singh examined solely himself throughout pre-summoning proof and produced no unbiased witness to ascertain that the alleged remarks had really broken his standing amongst others.
“This Court docket is of the thought of view that the continuation of the legal proceedings towards the petitioner wouldn’t serve the ends of justice, significantly when the respondent no. 2 [complainant advocate Siddhartha Singh], having examined himself as the only witness, has not positioned any materials to prima facie display that the alleged imputation had lowered his fame within the estimation of others as contemplated underneath Clarification 4 to Part 499 of IPC,” the Court docket noticed.
It added that the alleged imputation was based on an internet information report that has not been corroborated by examination of the involved reporter, writer, editor, or some other particular person related to the information portal.
Due to this fact, the Bench quashed the case.
