While considering their petitions to quash the defamation case, the Court observed that the complaint against Rishi Kumar would not be considered. It further said that the petitioners can’t be implicated in a defamation case just because they allowed him to participate in their programme.
The Court then went through the contents of the book. It noted that the original book was published in 2013 and its Malayalam translation titled Vishuddha Narakam was published in 2014. The books have since been in the market and can be easily purchased online.
As such, no case of defamation can stand against the petitioners who merely aired a programme with a discussion on the book, the Court said.
It, therefore, quashed the proceedings against Prakash and Nikesh Kumar.
However, before concluding its judgment, the Court expressed its surprise that even though there are serious allegations against Amritanandamayi, her mutt and her devotees, the complainant had chosen not to pursue any criminal case against its author or publisher.
“After going through the contents of the book which is made available by the counsel for the petitioners, I am surprised, as to why the author and publishers of the book are not prosecuted in this case, if the 1st respondent (complainant) who claims to be a devotee of Amritanandamayi, feel that there is defamation to her. The stance of the complainant seems like the author and publisher of the book (the book is in the public domain) can say anything, and they are free from prosecution, but nobody should speak about the contents of the book, which cannot be accepted,” the Court said.
To put it in context, the Court referred to the famous dialogue from the Malayalam movie Sandesham, “പോളണ്ടിനെ പറ്റി നീഒരക്ഷരം മിണ്ടരുത്” (Don’t speak a word about Poland), where one of the characters who is defending communism, gets irate when another character brings up the downfall of communist regime in Poland.
The Court wanted to highlight the pick and choose attitude adopted by the complainant in pursuing the case against media which reported about the book but not against the author or the publisher of the book itself, thereby putting a question mark over the entire defamation case.
Source: Barandbench
