Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Quashing of Second Criminal Complaint for Defamation — Second Complaint on Identical Facts Not Maintainable Without Setting Aside Earlier Dismissal Order. Filing of second complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC after dismissal of first complaint on merits and withdrawal of revision is barred; Magistrate's application of judicial mind, even if erroneous, does not permit second complaint.

Admin

2026-05-18 15:52:56

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, B.R.K. Aathithan, filed a criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC against the respondents, Sun Group and another, alleging defamation through telecast and publication of news regarding his arrest in an FIR under Section 468 IPC. The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the first complaint on 28-04-2015, holding that the allegations fell under the Fourth Exception to Section 499 IPC (publication of true report of proceedings of Court). The appellant filed a criminal revision before the Madras High Court, which was withdrawn on 10-06-2015 with liberty to work out remedy in law. Thereafter, the appellant filed a second complaint (STC 45/2017) identical to the first, adding only a paragraph about the revision. The Magistrate summoned the respondents, who then filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint. The High Court quashed the second complaint, holding that it was not maintainable as the first complaint was dismissed after full consideration of merits and the revision was withdrawn. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that a second complaint on identical facts is not maintainable unless the first dismissal was without application of mind or on a technical ground, or new facts have emerged. The Court held that the Magistrate's finding that the allegations fell under Exception 4 to Section 499 IPC constituted application of judicial mind, and even if erroneous, the remedy was to challenge that order, not file a second complaint. The withdrawal of the revision did not permit a fresh complaint on the same facts.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Second Complaint - Maintainability - Sections 203, 362, 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Second complaint on identical facts not maintainable unless first complaint was dismissed without application of judicial mind or on technical ground, or new facts have emerged - Held that dismissal after due application of mind, even if erroneous, bars second complaint unless the earlier order is set aside by a competent forum (Paras 14-17).

B) Criminal Defamation - Exception 4 to Section 499 IPC - Application of Judicial Mind - Sections 499, 500 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Magistrate's finding that allegations fall under Fourth Exception to Section 499 IPC constitutes application of judicial mind - Held that erroneous conclusion does not amount to non-application of mind; remedy lies in revision, not second complaint (Paras 15-16).

C) Criminal Revision - Withdrawal - Effect - Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Withdrawal of revision petition without merits adjudication does not permit filing of second complaint on same facts - Held that order granting liberty to work out remedy in law does not authorize filing of second complaint on identical set of facts (Paras 17-18).

Issue of Consideration

Whether a second criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC is maintainable when the first complaint was dismissed on merits after application of judicial mind and the revision against that dismissal was withdrawn.

Final Decision

Appeals dismissed; impugned judgment of the High Court quashing the second complaint upheld.

Law Points

Second complaint on same facts not maintainable unless first dismissed without merit consideration or on technical ground
Exception to Section 499 IPC requires application of judicial mind
Withdrawal of revision does not permit filing second complaint

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (11) 1

Criminal Appeal Nos.2080-2083/2022 (@SLP(Crl.) Nos.11601-11604/2022)

2022-11-29

Surya Kant, J.K. Maheshwari

B.R.K. Aathithan

Sun Group & Anr.

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against quashing of second complaint for defamation

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside High Court order quashing second criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC

Filing Reason

Appellant filed second complaint alleging defamation by respondents for telecasting and publishing news of his arrest; first complaint was dismissed on merits

Previous Decisions

First complaint dismissed by Judicial Magistrate on 28-04-2015; criminal revision withdrawn on 10-06-2015; second complaint filed; High Court quashed second complaint on 30-08-2019

Issues

Whether a second criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC is maintainable when the first complaint was dismissed on merits after application of judicial mind and the revision against that dismissal was withdrawn.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the first complaint was dismissed erroneously and that the second complaint was filed as per liberty granted by the High Court; relied on Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India to contend that onus was on respondents to prove Exception 4 to Section 499 IPC. Respondents argued that the second complaint was not maintainable as it was identical to the first, which was dismissed after full consideration, and the revision was withdrawn.

Ratio Decidendi

A second complaint on identical facts is not maintainable unless the first complaint was dismissed without application of judicial mind or on a technical ground, or new facts have emerged. Dismissal after due application of mind, even if erroneous, bars a second complaint unless the earlier order is set aside by a competent forum. Withdrawal of revision does not permit filing of a second complaint on the same facts.

Judgment Excerpts

There can be no quarrel that in view of the decisions of this Court in 'Pramantha Nath Talukdar v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar' AIR 1962 Supreme Court 876 and 'Shivshankar Singh Vs. State of Bihar and Another' (2012) 1 SCC 130, the second complaint can be maintainable in exceptional circumstances, depending upon the manner in which the first complaint came to be dismissed. The application of judicial mind and arriving at an erroneous conclusion are two distinct things. The Court even after due application of mind may reach to an erroneous conclusion and such an order is always justiciable before a superior Court. This Order cannot be construed to have permitted the appellant to file a second complaint on identical set of facts.

Procedural History

First complaint (STC No.45/2017? Actually first complaint not numbered) filed under Sections 499/500 IPC dismissed by Judicial Magistrate on 28-04-2015. Criminal Revision filed before Madras High Court withdrawn on 10-06-2015. Second complaint (STC 45/2017) filed; Magistrate summoned respondents. Respondents filed petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing. High Court quashed second complaint on 30-08-2019. Appellant filed SLP before Supreme Court; leave granted on 29-11-2022; appeal dismissed.