Skip to content


Mahim Chandra Roy Vs. A.H. Watson - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Reported inAIR1929Cal191
AppellantMahim Chandra Roy
RespondentA.H. Watson
Excerpt:
- .....alleging that the imputations were false, malicious, and grossly defamatory and had lowered the complainant's reputation as he had several relations who were widows. the magistrate sue motu dismissed the complaint giving reasons therefor. a petition for further enquiry into the complaint was dismissed by the sessions judge.2. the complainant thereupon moved the high court and obtained the present rule the sixth ground of which was:that the learned magistrate was wrong in law in dismissing the petition of complaint without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate the charge by adducing evidence.chotzner, j.3. we are of opinion after hearing the learned vakil for the petitioner that this rule should be made absolute on the sixth ground specified in the petition. we,.....
Judgment:

1. Certain imputations against the Indian widows appeared in an English daily the ' Statesman ' on 12th August 1927. A petition of complaint was filed against the editor and printer A.H. Watson alleging that the imputations were false, malicious, and grossly defamatory and had lowered the complainant's reputation as he had several relations who were widows. The Magistrate sue motu dismissed the complaint giving reasons therefor. A petition for further enquiry into the complaint was dismissed by the Sessions Judge.

2. The complainant thereupon moved the High Court and obtained the present rule the sixth ground of which was:

that the learned Magistrate was wrong in law in dismissing the petition of complaint without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate the charge by adducing evidence.

Chotzner, J.

3. We are of opinion after hearing the learned vakil for the petitioner that this rule should be made absolute on the sixth ground specified in the petition. We, therefore, remit the case to the learned Magistrate so that the petitioner may be given an opportunity of proving his case.

Gregory, J.

4. I agree.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //