Punjab and Haryana High Court refuses to quash summons in defamation case against IAF veteran for calling former Deputy Army Chief ‘coward’

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently refused to quash the summons issued by a Gurgaon court to a former officer of the Indian Air Force in a defamation case filed by former Deputy Army Chief Lt. Gen. Raj Kadyan [Vinod K Gandhi v. State of Haryana & Anr]..Justice Harkesh Manuja said that the emails on record showed that the accused, retired Group Captain Vinod K Gandhi had insinuated that Kadyan was a “coward”.The same cannot be said to have been done in good faith, the Court said while further noting that there were contents also which did not suit the prestige of a decorated Army officer who had served the nation for about 40 years.“Even with respect to the definition of the word “coward”, it is required to be looked into whether the general meaning applicable to an ordinary person, can also be made applicable in the specific context of defence personnel, for whom it could be more insulting,” observed the Court..Gandhi moved the High Court challenging the summoning order passed by a Magistrate in 2017 on Kadyan’s complaint and the subsequent dismissal of his revision by an Additional Session Judge.His principal argument before the Court was that the case was covered under Exceptions 4 and 5 of Section 499 (defamation) of Indian Penal Code. The exceptions pertain to publication of court proceedings.In this context, Gandhi’s counsel submitted that the primary grievance of Kadyan was that he had been called ‘coward’ but the same was based on the latter's service record as mentioned in a case related to his service. The relevant extract is as under,.Looking into the observations made by Kadyan’s superiors, Justice Manuja reasoned that the use of words like “...should be bold and aggressive in operation”, may not always mean in absolute terms that the complainant was designated a “coward”. If someone is termed as “not bold or aggressive”, it might mean that one might not be offensive enough as demanded in war circumstances but it could not necessarily mean in all probabilities that the person is a coward, the Court added..The Court also took into account the testimony of other witnesses with Kadyan’s complaint and said the trial court has rightly relied upon the preliminary evidence.“In the given circumstances, the exercise of going into the details of word “coward” and other alleged defamatory contents and applicability of the exceptions of Section 499 IPC can be looked into during the trial only,” it added..The Court further said that the scope of interference in such cases by the High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), is very limited. “In view of the discussion made above, warranting no interference in the concurrent findings of the Courts below, the present petition is dismissed,” it ordered..Advocate ADS Jattana represented the petitioner.Deputy Advocate General Rajiv Sidhu appeared for the State of HaryanaSenior Advocate Amit Jhanji with Advocate Nandita Verma represented the complainant. [Read Judgment]