Shrinath Vashishtha v. Superintendent Of Police And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/955/2022 Shrinath Vashishtha ... Petitioner Vs.

The Superintendent of Police and another ... Respondents Mr. Shrinath Vashishtha ...petitioner (in person) Mrs. Anjli Nag ... for the respondent no.1 Mr. Md. Tabraiz ... for the private respondent December 22, 2022 [SR] Item No.17 The petitioner complains that the private respondent who is an Advocate of this Court has assaulted him in the Court premises. He has lodged complain with the Police Station Aberdeen. He also written to the Superintendent of Police.

In terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Sakiri Vasu vs State Of U.P. And Others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409, the petitioner may approach the Magistrate under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. In so far as the threat perception and security cover of the petitioner, this Court has received inputs from Ms. Anjili Nag, learned counsel appearing for the Superintendent of Police. It is submitted that, after due enquiry, it was found that there is no threat perception.

Mr. Mohammed Tabraiz, learned counsel appearing for the private respondent has placed repeated Tweets and publications by the writ petitioner-journalist against the private respondent defaming him. The private respondent may take steps in accordance with law.

The petitioner shall desist from making any publication against the private respondent and the private respondent undertakes not to commit any violence on the petitioner, if at all committed earlier.

The proceedings that may be taken up by the parties shall be dealt with uninfluenced of any observations of this Court hereinabove.

WPA/955/2022 stands disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. )