The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed a criminal defamation complaint filed against the Managing Director of a newspaper company, holding that liability for newspaper content cannot be fastened on a Managing Director in the absence of specific allegations showing his role in selecting or publishing the material. The Court also found that the news report in question was not defamatory in law.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a news report published on 7 April 2019 regarding the killing of an Army personnel in Sopore. According to the complainant, the report mistakenly carried his photograph instead of that of the deceased soldier. He alleged that the publication harmed his reputation, exposed him to threats, and led to social boycott because he was wrongly portrayed as an Army man.
A criminal complaint alleging defamation under Section 500 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, which issued summons against the newspaper company's Managing Director. After a revision petition was dismissed as not maintainable, the Managing Director approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings.
Court's Observations
Justice Sanjay Dhar examined the provisions of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, particularly the statutory role assigned to an Editor.
The Court noted that the Act creates a legal presumption only against the person shown as the Editor because the Editor is responsible for selecting the content that appears in the newspaper. It observed that there is no similar statutory presumption against a Managing Director or other company officials unless the complaint contains specific allegations demonstrating their involvement.
Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in K.M. Mathew v. K.A. Abraham, the Court observed that while persons other than the Editor can be prosecuted in appropriate cases, such prosecution requires clear allegations showing their responsibility for the publication.
"The Act of 1867 only recognizes Editor for the purpose of holding him responsible in any civil or criminal proceedings in respect of publication of the newspaper," the bench observed.
The Court found that the complaint contained no specific allegation that the petitioner had any role in selecting or approving the news content. It also noted that the newspaper's declaration identified another person as the Editor responsible for content selection.
News Report Not Defamatory, Court Says
The High Court further held that the impugned publication did not amount to defamation.
According to the Court, merely publishing an engineer's photograph in place of that of an Army personnel, though mistaken, could not automatically be treated as harming the complainant's reputation.
"The impugned offending news item is not at all defamatory in nature," the Court observed, adding that being mistakenly shown as a member of the Indian Armed Forces could not, by itself, be regarded as lowering a person's reputation.
The Court also took note of an earlier order by which proceedings against the co-accused in the same complaint had already ended in acquittal.
Decision
Allowing the petition, the High Court quashed the criminal complaint and all consequential proceedings against the petitioner.
It held that, in the absence of any statutory presumption or specific allegations linking the Managing Director to the publication of the disputed news report, continuation of the prosecution was not legally sustainable.
Case Details
Case Title: Vineet Jain v. Aman Zargar
Case Number: CRM(M) No. 132/2023 (CrlM No. 329/2023)
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar
Decision Date: 13 July 2026
-300x169.webp)
