The High Court J&K cancels the defamation file against the reporter who highlighted the improper use of the Hospital for Personal Use by GOVT officials

High Court Jammu and Kashmir He extinguished a criminal defamation file against a reporter that covered a story about the wrong use of a public hospital ambulance by government officials. The court held that the news report did not call the respondent and was not explicitly quoted as responsible for improper use.

The court stated that it is a general report on the administration of inactivity of the hospital. In addition, he mentioned that the respondent, who was a driver of one of the ambulances, assumed that the alleged improper use was assigned to him.

A bank of Justice Rajnesh Oswal He noted that only because the respondent was suspended, whether he is right or wrong, would not determine any cause for the respondent to sue the petitioner, especially when there was nothing in evidence to prove that The news was published at the petitioner’s court. It is relevant to mention that the news report did not contain the name of the correspondent who reported the story.

The court also noted that the magistrate issued the process against the petitioner for committing the crime of defamation in a mechanical manner. The court mentioned that the court learned did not register the applicant’s statements in the oath, while, in accordance with the mandate of section 200 of CR.PC, these statements must be registered.

The court expressed the surprise that no witnesses were examined, especially when the accusation against the petitioner was to defame the respondent.

BACKGROUND

The petitioner is a reporter for a newspaper on which a story was published about the wrong use of a public ambulance by government officials. The article claimed that the hospital’s ambulance was used as a load carrier, which makes it unavailable for emergencies. The respondent, being a driver of one of the ambulances, filed a criminal complaint, claiming that the news report is falsely involved, which led to suspension and public humiliation.

The court held that there is nothing in highlighting that the petitioner was responsible for publishing the report, because other reporters also covered the same area. In addition, the court noted that there is nothing in relation that specifically attributes the improper use of the respondent. Therefore, the court annulled the criminal procedures against the petitioner reporter.

Appearance

Ashish Sharma, petitioner lawyer

Za Qazi, lawyer for respondents

Case title: Rajesh Tandon vs Mohd. Safeer 2025 Livelaw (JKL)

Click here to read/download your order