R. Narayana Pisharadi ORDER
R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.
1. The petitioner is the sole accused in the case S.T. No. 1877/2015 pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur.
2. The aforesaid case is one instituted upon the complaint (Annexure-K) filed by the first respondent (hereinafter referred to also as 'the complainant'). The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The petitioner was a Professor in the St.Thomas College, Thrissur. He was the Chairman of the company by name M/s. Cherupushpam Kuries (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'). The complainant was the Deputy Chairman and a Legal Advisor of the company.
4. The company had engaged the complainant to institute suits for realisation of money due from the subscribers to the kuries conducted by it. There was an allegation that he did not institute the suits after receiving money from the company towards the expenses in that regard. Subsequently, the complainant resigned from the post of the Deputy Chairman of the company.
5. While so, one K.K. Ramadas, who is a lawyer, filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 5239/2013) before this Court against the University of Calicut and the petitioner and some other persons. Suffice it to state here that the writ petition was filed for issuing directions with regard to the domestic enquiry conducted against the petitioner on the allegation that while working as a Senior Lecturer in the St.Thomas College he had also engaged in the business activities of the company.
6. The allegation in Annexure-K complaint is that, in the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5239/2013, he had stated that the writ petitioner was an associate of Adv. C.R. Jaison (the complainant) who was the former Director and Legal Advisor of the company and he (Adv. C.R. Jaison) was removed from the company on proved misconduct and misappropriation of the funds of the company. It is also alleged in Annexure-K complaint that in the Directors' Report contained in the 30th annual report of the company it was mentioned that the complainant resigned from the company on account of dereliction of duty in conducting the cases for and on behalf of the company.
7. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the accused for quashing Annexure-K complaint and all proceedings against him pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur based on the complaint.
8. Heard learned senior counsel who appeared for the petitioner and also the first respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.
9. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions: (1) The statements made about the complainant in the annual report of the company and the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner in the writ petition are not defamatory in nature. (2) Making a statement in the counter affidavit filed in a writ petition before this Court does not amount to publication. (3) No criminal liability would arise on making any defamatory statement in a judicial proceeding before a court of law. (4) The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the fifth and the eighth exceptions provided to Section 499 of the........