Public Prosecutor Can File Proceedings If Minister Of State Is Defamed In Relation To Conduct Of His Public Function: Calcutta High Court

The High Court was considering a revisional application where the applicant was aggrieved by the order of issuance of summons.

The Single Bench of Justice Apurba Sinha Ray held, “Without scrutiny of the relevant evidence, it cannot be said at this initial stage that the cognizance taken by the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Kolkata is bad in law. It is alleged that there are at least two prior cases initiated by two different private persons on the self-same ground. Needless to mention, the question whether such private persons in their personal capacity can file defamation suit or criminal proceedings on the allegation that Hon’ble Chief Minister has been defamed, can be appropriately decided in the appropriate legal forum, but so far as the present case is concerned it is apposite to mention that the concerned Public Prosecutor has a statutory right to file appropriate proceedings if the Minister of a State etc. is defamed in relation to his conduct in discharge of his public function.”

Senior Advocate Rajdeep Mazumder represented the Petitioner while Public Prosecutor Debasish Roy represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

An author wrote a book, which was first published in the year 2015, stating that the current Chief Minister of the State of West Bengal married one person clandestinely, along with some other alleged details of the Minister’s private life prior to her assuming the post of Chief Minister. In the said book this alleged marriage and alleged relationship were depicted as undisclosed facts and seemingly the author wanted to make it public that the claim of the Chief Minister that she is an unmarried lady was untrue and further her alleged relationship did not match with her claim of honesty and personal integrity. The author disclosed that on April 30, 2012 he wrote a letter to the Chief Minister (giving her designation as Chairperson of All India Trinamool Congress Party) asking some information directly from the Chairperson of the Trinamool Congress Party.

The applicant, being an Advocate and politician, uploaded some pages of the said book containing the letter in social media platforms and also allegedly made comments touching the personal life of the Chief Minister in several television networks. The Public Prosecutor, City Sessions Court, Calcutta, filed the relevant complaint case for commission of offences punishable under section 356(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (BNS 2023), availing the privilege of the Minister as per section 222(2) BNSS 2023 after obtaining statutory sanction in this regard. The Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta directed the issuance of summons upon the applicant.

Reasoning

The Bench, at the outset, found the petition to be maintainable. The Bench reiterated the settled position that although the proposed accused cannot file application for dismissal of the complaint ignoring the scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ BNSS, he can file an application for quashing under section 482 of Cr.P.C corresponding to section 528 BNSS in appropriate cases.

It was further noted that the Public Prosecutor can file an application under Section 222(2) of BNSS for a defamatory statement made by a person against a public functionary, mentioned in the said subsection, only when such statement relates to the conduct of the public functionary in the discharge of his public function, subject to receipt of sanction from the appropriate government. As per the Bench, the allegations of undisclosed marriage of the Chief Minister along with deeply personal matters were matters of the Minister’s personal life but, after depicting the concerned person as the husband of her undisclosed alleged marriage, the author sought for information from her as to whether such person was present in the Chief Minister’s Office or whether such person was present at the time of her oath taking ceremony as Chief Minister in Bidhan Sabha (State Assembly).

The Bench noted the applicant’s Cousnel’s submission that the applicant did not author the book but he merely reproduced the pages of the said book which allegedly contained some defamatory remarks against the Chief Minister. Referring to the book in question, the Bench noted that in the very second page of the book, it was specifically written that no part of the said book could be printed, published, sold or distributed without permission from the author.

“When the issue of reproduction from an original book is involved, the direction/ wish/ intention of the author for use of his works should be respected and should be taken into consideration by the Court. When the author, in his wisdom, has expressly made an embargo for republication of his works without his permission, nobody can reproduce the same without permission from the author or the person who holds the copyright over the book. Apparently, no material is placed before the court showing such permission was obtained by the applicant before publication of the letter dated 30/04/2012”, it stated.

As per the Bench, the lodging of complaint under section 222(2) Cr.P.C at the instance of the Public prosecutor is allowed subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. Thus, in view of such facts and circumstances, the Bench upheld the issuance of summons and dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: Koustav Bagchi Vs. The State of West Bengal (Case No.: CRR 2817 of 2025)

Appearance

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Rajdeep Mazumder, Advocates Moyukh Mukherjee, Samrat Mondal

Respondent: Public Prosecutor Debasish Roy, Additional Public Prosecutor Rudradipta Nandy

Click here to read/download Order