Chennai, June 26: Upholding a magistrate's rejection of a plea by complainants in a defamation case to dispense with their presence, the Madras High Court has held that it was mandatory for the prosecution to examine witnesses or complainants, particularly in a defamation case, to establish the guilt or otherwise of the accused. The ruling was given by Justice A Packiaraj, while dismissing a criminal revision petition, filed by a financial commissioner (Railways) and ex-officio secretary in the railway ministry Vijayalakshmi Vishwanathan and senior signal and telecommunications engineer of southern railways Stephen Raj, challenging a Madurai judicial magistrate's order declining to dispense with their presence in a defamation case filed by them.

He said as far as the stage of adducing evidence was concerned, to establish the guilt or otherwise of the accused it was mandatory on the part of the prosecution to examine the witnesses to determine the offence.

On the magistrate's summons to the complainants to appear in court, the judge said that as per CrPC, Evidences Act and Criminal Rules of Practice, witnesses had no right to abstain from appearing in the court and giving evidence.

The officials filed a complaint against two persons, alleging that letters written by the two to them were per se defamatory.

Bureau Report