High Court Reverses Acquittal, Convicts Editor for Defamation
The Karnataka High Court has delivered a significant verdict, setting aside the acquittal of a newspaper editor and sentencing him to six months of simple imprisonment in a criminal defamation case. The ruling, passed on November 3, 2025, by Justice S Rachaiah, found the editor, T Gururaj, guilty of publishing defamatory content that harmed the reputation of a police officer.
The Case and the Alleged Motive for Defamation
The case originated from a complaint filed by S N Suresh Babu, who was serving as the circle inspector of police at K R police station in Mysuru at the time of the incident. The history between the two men played a central role in the case. Babu had previously arrested Gururaj in an unrelated matter and produced him before a court.
It was alleged that Gururaj, angered by his arrest, sought revenge against the police officer. He subsequently used his position as a newspaper editor to publish a series of articles containing serious and unsubstantiated allegations against Babu.
Defamatory Publications and Their Impact
The court noted that the published articles made several damaging claims against Inspector Babu. These included accusations that he was accepting bribes and illegally permitting people to operate a single-number lottery. Furthermore, the publications alleged that Babu was involved in allowing illegal activities such as running a card-playing club, prostitution, and the sale of adulterated kerosene.
One specific allegation stated that Babu was illegally receiving money from parking agents near Chamundi Hill. The High Court observed that these statements, published in the newspaper, caused significant harm to Babu's reputation, making him suffer in the eyes of his family, relatives, and the general public.
Legal Battle: From Trial Court Acquittal to High Court Conviction
Following the publication of the articles, Babu initiated legal proceedings by filing a defamation complaint. The trial court, after examining the evidence presented, acquitted editor T Gururaj.
Unsatisfied with this outcome, Inspector Babu approached the Karnataka High Court. His counsel argued that the trial court had failed to properly appreciate the evidence and had overlooked the fact that Gururaj had made baseless allegations of a defamatory nature.
Gururaj's defense contended that statements made for the public good cannot be considered defamatory. However, the High Court found this argument unpersuasive in light of the evidence.
The High Court's Rationale and Final Judgment
Upon a careful review of both oral and documentary evidence, Justice Rachaiah concluded that the trial court had erred. The judge stated, "On careful reading of the evidence... it appears that the respondent has published the words or statements in his newspaper which cause or harm the reputation of the appellant. Making baseless allegations to defame the dignity of an individual certainly would amount to defamation."
The court also highlighted that the serious allegations published by Gururaj were denied and that no action had been initiated by higher police authorities on these issues, further undermining their credibility.
Consequently, the High Court set aside the acquittal order. It convicted T Gururaj under Sections 500 (defamation) and 501 (printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory) of the Indian Penal Code and imposed a sentence of six months of simple imprisonment.
