The Delhi High Court has clarified that mere filing of complaints not defamation, even where such complaints are later found to be false, unless there is clear intent to harm reputation.
The Court held that invoking lawful remedies before competent authorities cannot, by itself, attract criminal defamation under the Indian Penal Code.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that mere filing of complaints not defamation unless the complainant acted with intention, knowledge or reasonable belief that the imputations would damage the reputation of the accused.
Complaints made in due course of law enjoy statutory protection and cannot be criminalised merely because they fail or are alleged to be false.
Court’s Reasoning on Defamation and Legal Complaints
The Court emphasised that defamation under Section 500 IPC requires foundational facts showing malicious intent.
Mere filing of complaints not defamation when the allegations are placed before statutory or investigative authorities through lawful channels.
The act of approaching authorities is an exercise of legal rights and does not automatically amount to an offence.
Justice Krishna reiterated that courts must draw a clear distinction between abuse of process and genuine recourse to law.
Criminal prosecution for defamation cannot be sustained in the absence of prima facie material showing deliberate harm to reputation.
Case Background
The ruling arose from a petition filed by a company director who challenged the discharge of four former women employees from defamation proceedings.
The director alleged that after leaving employment, the women stole confidential data and retaliated by filing false sexual harassment complaints, leading to registration of four FIRs.
He contended that the complaints were malicious and defamatory.
However, the Metropolitan Magistrate dismissed his complaint, holding that no entrustment was shown for criminal breach of trust and no foundational material existed to support defamation charges.
Findings of the Revisional Court and the High Court
The Additional Sessions Judge upheld the Magistrate’s order, though one woman was directed to be summoned under Section 506 IPC based on alleged threats of filing false sexual harassment cases, which disclosed criminal intimidation.
Before the High Court, the petitioner again argued that the FIRs were malafide. The Court rejected this contention, holding that the nature or validity of the FIRs was not the subject matter of the defamation complaint.
The High Court reaffirmed that mere filing of complaints not defamation, and found no infirmity in the orders passed by the courts below.
The Court held that no prima facie case was made out against the women under Sections 182, 211, 406, 500, 34 or 120B IPC. The summoning of one accused under Section 506 IPC alone was found legally sustainable.
Final Outcome
Dismissing the petition, the Delhi High Court held that mere filing of complaints not defamation when complaints are lodged before authorities in accordance with law.
The Court concluded that the impugned orders required no interference.
Case Details
- Case Title: Rajan Sareen v. State NCT of Delhi and Others
- Court: Delhi High Court
- Bench: Justice Neena Bansal Krishna
- Decision: Petition dismissed
- Key Holding: Mere filing of complaints not defamation unless intent to harm reputation is established
Follow Mahamana News For More Recent Judgments
Rajan Sareen v. State NCT of Delhi and Others
