* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment Reserved On: 30th September, 2011
Judgment Delivered On: 10th October, 2011
+ CRL.M.C.2111/2007
VINEET JAIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Manish Shukla and
Mr.Yoginder Handoo, Advocates
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.2704/2007
ARINDAM SEN GUPTA & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.R.K.Handoo, Mr.Yoginder
Handu, and Mr.Manish Shukla
Advocates
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.2863/2007
RAMESH CHANDER AGARWAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.R.K.Handoo, Mr.Yoginder
Handu, Mr.Pramod Kumar
Dubey, Mr.Kunal Sood,
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 1 of 27
Mr.Himanshu Gupta and
Mr.Manish Shukla Advocates
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.3082/2007
DURBAR GANGULY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Subash Gulati, Mr.Ravi Nayak
and Mr.Samarjit Pattnaik,
Advocates
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.3083/2007
CHANDAN MITRA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Subash Gulati, Mr.Ravi Nayak
and Mr.Samarjit Pattnaik,
Advocates
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 2 of 27
CRL.M.C.182/2008
MAHINDER MOHAN GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Jagmohan Sharma, Advocate
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.1052/2008
JAGRAN PRAKASHAN LTD. & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Jagmohan Sharma, Advocate
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CRL.M.C.1224/2008
MANOJ CG ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Jainendra Maldahiyar,
Advocate for Mr.Anurag Ranjan,
Advocate
versus
NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate
with Mr.Archit Upadhayay and
Mr.Ankit Mishra, Advocates for R-
2
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 3 of 27
SI Sanjay, ARC/Crime Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
Digest?
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
1. Backdrop facts giving rise to the present petitions are
that on 03.06.2006 the Crime Branch of Delhi Police raided
Rajdoot Hotel on Mathura Road and arrested 13 girls
allegedly performing obscene dance in the hotel.
2. FIR No.391 dated 4.6.2006 for offences punishable
under Section 294/109/34 IPC read with Section 8 of
Immoral Trafficking Act was registered at PS Nizamuddin on
the statement of Sh.Rajeev Kumar Choudhary, a decoy sent,
English Translation of which reads as under:
“It is stated that I have been residing at the
above-said address and I am a Horticulture
Contractor by profession. Today I came towards
Jangpura for some work. At about 10.40 pm you
met me on the Mathura Road towards Bhogal
side opposite Rajdoot Hotel. You told me that
the Hotel Management of Eldarado Bar of
Rajdoot Hotel illegally performing the dances
with obscene actions. You have further told me
that the Dancing Girls with their indecent acts
exciting for sex activities and that they grab
customers for illegal work. You have asked
about this from 7-8 other persons for their
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 4 of 27
participation in the Raiding Party but except Dilip
Kumar, S/o Shri Shyam Sunder, Employee of G-
Star Hotel 22/7, Old Rajinder Nagar, no one
agreed to join and had left after giving excuses
without disclosing their names and addresses. I,
Dilip Kumar agreed taking it as social
responsibility. You handed over to me 4
currency Notes of denomination of `500/= each
bearing Nos. (1) 1-5 AA 67434, (2) 2-5 AJ
663436, (3) 3-2 AA 797785, (4) 4-7 AA 334165.
After taking my search and after taking signature
on the Memo. You have given us instructions
and advised us to buy the Entrance Ticket of
`500 each for entering into Eldorado Restaurant,
Rajdoot Hotel and advised us to witness the
show. In case the girls do any obscene activity
then Dilip Kumar shall come out of the Main Gate
where Darban stands through the Reception and
shall give the signal by keeping both his hands
on his head. On this advice, we both went to
Rajdoot Hotel around 11 PM. There I purchased
two Tickets of `500/- each from the Counter near
the Reception from the Hotel Staff bearing Ticket
No.23609 and 23610. We entered into the Bar
and we saw that on the stage in the corner four
girls at a time wearing colourful and half nude
dresses are dancing and near the stage the
owner of the Hotel who has a French beard,
whose name we came to know as Babbu Kalra.
He was telling the girls dancing on the stage to
show more obscene gestures and dance. On this
the girls were showing their cleavage and thighs
and also made gestures by hand towards their
private body parts. On seeing this I started
getting thoughts about sex. On this the entire
atmosphere became dirty and I also got excited
and I started feeling bad. But these girls carried
on with their dance of obscene gestures. And
like this two other girls came on the dance stage
turn by turn and made same obscene gestures to
excite for sex by showing such obscene gestures
and after seeking this we felt really bad. They
crossed all the moral limits.
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 5 of 27On seeing this we were not able to tolerate and
as per the instructions given by you, Dilip Kumar
at about 11.30 AM went out to give signal to the
Raiding Party. In the meanwhile this obscene
dance was going on. All these Girls were
performing these actions on the instigation of the
owner of the Hotel Babbu Kalra. During this
time, you along with Police party came inside the
Hall and took under control the 13 girls with the
help of the Ladies Police whose names are
disclosed as under:1. Pooja w/o Sumit Mahajan, R/o 52/16, Ground
Floor, CR Park, New Delhi age 24 years.2. Kiran D/o Chotelal Gupta, R/o Asira Bazar, Tehsil
Hasia, Zila Allahabad (UP) age 19 years.3. Maya D/o Suresh Kumar R/o Room No.117,
Rajdoot Hotel, New Delhi4. Isha D/o Kabir R/o 40/50, 2nd Floor, CR Park, New
Delhi5. Karishma W/o Kapil Dev gilani, R/o I 3/68, Sector
16, Rohini6. Nancy D/o Islam R/o Hall Address, Room No.166,
Hotel Rajdoot, New Delhi7. Rekha W/o Robin R/o 797, Sector 19, Pocket-3,
Dwarka, New Delhi8. Lily Dass D/o Pooran Kumar Dass R/o SF-16,
Block-D, Kohey Fiza Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh9. Kareena D/o Kishan La, R/o F-40, Jawahar Bagh,
Shakarpur, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi10. Tabassum D/o Siddharth Bhardwaj R/o 200, Lodhi
Road Complex, New Delhi.11. Anjali D/o Surender Yadav R/o A-703, Seventh
Floor, Kanchanjunga Apartment Dwarka, New
Delhi12. Maya Singh W/o Rajender Singh R/o I-Block,
Saurabh Vihar, Jaitpur, Badarpur, New Delhi.13. Reenu Saxena, W/o Sarab Saxena, R/o 727,
Sector 19, Pocket 111 Dwarka, New Delhi.
These girls with their gestures and talks were
instigating the customers for the wrong deeds
and the customers were getting instigated to
involve in wrong deeds. Apart from us, Shri
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 6 of 27
Ramesh Bahl, S/o Shri Amar Nath, R/o 1692 Arya
Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi and Shri Anil
Kumar S/o Preetam Kumar R/o C-34, Shakti
Nagar, Delhi had also come to see the dance and
they were also shocked and angry to see the
show with about 50 to 60 audience who were
also watching the show. Out of all these
audience, most of them were also instigated with
the same vulgar feelings as we were. In this
regard, police investigation shall be carried out
against Shri Babbu Kalra whose full name is Man
Mohan Kalra S/o Shri Kishan Lal Kalra and I have
handed over the two tickets whose numbers I
have already given you along with the two `500
denomination notes. Statement heard and it is
correct.”3. An endorsement was made beneath the
statement which reads as under:-“ACP had the information of Rajdoot Hotel that
the owner Babbu Kalra and Prem Kalra are
running a dance Bar in the Hotel where they
serve drinks and girls from different cities of
India perform obscene dances. Where these girls
with their obscene gestures instigate the
customers. This information was brought to the
knowledge and secretly it was investigated and it
was found to be correct. We the Raiding Team
alongwith ACP, Inspector Jeet Singh Special
Team, Inspector Raj Vir Singh, AATS/Crime
Branch and Staff SI Raj Kumar, SI Bhagwati
Prasad, SI Buddh Parkash, ASI Ravinder Const.
Sanjay Kain. Special Team SI Pankaj Yadav, SI
Sehdev Rana, HC Bheem Singh, HC Tanveer,
AATS Staff, SI Surinder Rana, ASI Sameer Singh,
Const. Pardeep Hudda, Const.Sat Pal, Lady SI
Pushap Yadav and Lady Const.Kavita, 48, Crime
Branch, Lady Const.Mukesh No.303 DRP, Lady
Const.Anita No.2947/Crime. This team had
already been called and instructed to develop on
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 7 of 27
the information and the Police Station of the area
Jangpura Mathura Road was informed about it
and the team was present there. The secret
informer informed that at this time also there are
obscene dances/Cabra is going on in the Hotel
Rajdoot. On this information one Raiding Party
alongwith a Staff and Rajiv Kumar Chaudhary
along with Dilip Kumamr was prepared and the
instructions were given to both the witnesses
and were also handed over two notes of
denomination of `500/- each and were instructed
to go into the Rajdoot Hotel and watch the dance
and were further instructed that if any obscene
activities are taking place then witness Dilip
Kumar would come out and would make the
instructed indication. Thereafter, all of us also
took position around Rajdoot Hotel. At about
11.30 PM, on the indication given by the Witness
Dilip Kumar the whole Raiding Party went into
Bar Hall of the Rajdoot Hotel i.e. Eldorado
Restaurant where 13 girls who were dancing turn
by turn on the stage and were making obscene
gestures to instigate the people sitting in the Bar
Room and Babbu Kalra who was also instigating
them to perform such obscene gestures were
taken under custody. The complainant Rajeev
Kumar Chaudhary S/o Ram Veer Singh recorded
his statement and case u/s 294/109/34 IPC and
u/s 8 of ITP Act was registered. That Case may
be registered.”4. The police released a press release, which reads as
under:-“With the arrest of 13 bar girls caught while
performing obscene, sex provocative, semi-nude
floor dancing shows at Rajdoot Hotel, Mathura
Road, last night, sleuths of crime branch Delhi
Police have been able to smash a well organized,
scandalous racket being run by the owners of the
said hotel where the dance bar girls from Bombay
dance openly enticed/allure the visiting guests for
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 8 of 27
sexual acts while dressed in alluring and scanty
dresses. One of the partners of said hotel namely
Manmohan @ Babbu Kalra has also been arrested
for abetting, aiding these dance bar girls to
achieve their illegal designs.An information was received at crime branch that
the owners of Rajdoot Hotel are flourishing there
business by organizing floor dance shows where
dance girls allure customers through obscene
gestures, words, actions, wilfully exposing their
person to attract the attention of
spectators/guests for the purpose of prostitution.
For this purpose the hoteliers facilitates them by
providing accommodation at their hotel for
carrying out their illegal, nefarious and antisocial
activities in the garb of floor dance playing sexy
songs/tunes. The hotel management charge each
guest `500.This information was developed by the officers of
Anti Robbery Cell crime branch, specifically
entrusted with this task. On verification through
secret sources the information was found to be
authentic. The hotel owners used extra ordinary
vigilant system using Hi-tech security/monitoring
gadgets installed at the various locations of hotel
to ward off any checks on their anti social
activities. They have hired a number of
musclemen, bouncers, extra guards to inform
them.A raid was organized on a specific tip off at the
premises of hotel Eldrado dance bar, under the
supervision of A.C.P. P.P. Singh comprising the
selected staff of crime branch, after the decoy
gave the predetermined signal. 13 dancing girls
of the bar cum dancing hall of Eldrado in turn were
detained along with Manmohan @ Babbo Kalra a
partner in the said hotel. A case vide
F.I.R.No.391/06 dated 4/5/06 U/S 294/109/34 I.P.C.
& 8 I.T.P. Act has been registered at P.S.
Nizamuddin. Sufficient number of lady police
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 9 of 27
officers were also member of the raiding party.
Investigation of the case has been taken by Insp.
Ran Singh of A.R. cell crime branch.”5. It is apparent that the matter was of public concern
and that was the reason why the police released a press
release. The incident was published in various newspapers
the day next i.e. 5.6.2006 and since the above-captioned
petitions pertain to news published in 4 newspapers, we
reproduce the contents thereof.6. In the newspaper „The Times of India‟ it was reported
as under:-“Police Swoop on S.Delhi „dance bar‟ 13 Girls,
Hotel Owner NabbedNew Delhi: An illegal dance bar being run in a
south Delhi hotel was busted by crime branch on
Saturday. Fourteen persons – 13 dance bar girls
and one of the hotel owners – were arrested on
several charges, ranging from obscenity to
immoral trafficking and abetment.The accused girls were allegedly caught dancing
in a scantily clad state. “A raid was conducted
on the premises of El Dorado dance bar in Hotel
Rajdoot after a signal from an undercover cop,
who had been present inside. The girls were
caught red-handed,” said Tejendra Luthra, DCP
(crime branch). “We also arrested Manmohan
alias Babbu Kalra, who is a partner in the hotel,”
he added.An FIR was registered at the Nizamuddin police
station under the relevant sections of the IPC and
the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act on Sunday.
The girls were later released on bail.
Police said the girls were aged between 20 and
30 and hailed from lower middle-class families.
While four of them are from Delhi, two each are
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 10 of 27
from Bihar, Noida and Punjab and one each from
Kolkata and Allahabad. The last woman, the only
married person among the girls, said she was a
hotel guest. Police suspect that her husband
was also involved in the racket. He was detained
for questioning.During interrogation, it was revealed that some
of the accused girls were employed in Mumbai
dance bars but after those establishments were
shut down they were forced to shift base to the
Capital. Crime branch officials were tipped-off
about the hotel‟s flourishing business on account
of floor dance shows.Rajdoot Hotel had apparently been hosting
clandestine shows for their clients since the past
six years or more, charging `500 as entry fees.
Inside Eldorado bar the dance girls “lured
customers with obscene gestures”. The owners
of the hotel allegedly facilitated the dance bar
girls with rooms where they indulged in flesh
trade, apart from providing the dance floor.Further investigations revealed that the hotel
owner had an elaborate system in place to avoid
detection by the police. “Sophisticated gadgets
used for security monitoring were installed at
strategic points to alert the hotel administration
at the slightest hint of trouble,” a senior official
said. “That apart, they had hired several
bouncers muscle men and additional security
guards to keep them informed of any law-
enforcement activity in and around the hotel,”
added the official.Undercover cops entered the bar as guests late
on Saturday night, and signaled the raiding
police team around 11.30 pm, after the “erotic
dancing” began. Within minutes, the hotel was
surrounded by uniformed policemen.”Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 11 of 27
7. In the newspaper „Dainik Bhaskar‟ it was published as
under:-“13 GIRLS INVOLVED IN FLESH TRADE ARRESTED
Bhaskar News. New Delhi, 4 June, Delhi
Police Crime Branch has arrested 13 girls who
were in the flesh trade from Rajdoot Hotel on
Mathura Road.The Police have said on Saturday night the
Crime Branch raided Rajdoot Hotel and arrested
13 girls. They said the ages of all the girls were
between 20 to 25 years. They are residing in
Mumbai and working in Dance Bars. After the
Dance Bar shut down the shifted to Delhi and
started working in Rajdoot Hotel and under the
cover of doing massage, started working in the
flesh trade. The Police have arrested one
middleman in connection with this. His name is
Manmohan.”8. In the newspaper „The Pioneer‟ it was published as
under:-“13 dance bar girls, owner of posh hotel arrested
The owner of a hotel in a posh south Delhi
locality and 13 dance bar girls performing there
were arrested after police raided its premises in
the wee hours today, police said.Acting on a tip-off, Delhi Police sleuths raided
Hotel Rajdoot near Nizamuddin and arrested
Babbu Kalra, one of the partners of the hotel,
and 13 bar dancers most of them brought here
from Mumbai. The girls were arrested on
charges of performing obscene and provocativeCrl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 12 of 27
sexual acts, while Kalra is being charged with
aiding and abetting them, police said.Most of the girls have been brought from
Mumbai, where they were working in bars before
the Maharashtra Government closed them down,
police added”9. The next day i.e. on 06.06.2006 in the newspaper „The
Pioneer‟ it was further published as under:-“Bar Girls back on Rajdoot Floor
Hotel earns more from dance bars than room
occupancy
Neeraj Chauhan New Delhi
The 13 girls, who were caught while dancing, serving
drinks and enticing guests at Rajdoot Hotel on Sunday
were back, in business at the hotel‟s Eldorado, bar on
Monday.According to a senior police officer, failing to have a
brisk business, the three star-rated hotel served
everything – girls, wine and music against provisions
of licensing act. More than 90 percent business of the
hotel was from dance bar girls, as room occupancy
rate was very low. Rajdoot hotel is the only three star
hotel in Delhi where floor shows take place.The officer also informed that all these girls are from
lower middle class families and most of them are
unmarried or divorcees. They had worked in Mumbai
bars earlier and know how to attract customers. They
were being paid `10,000/- per month apart from what
they get on the dance floor.Earlier 79 girls were arrested by Crime Branch from
this hotel in 1988. Manmohan Kalra alias Babbu (50)
runs this hotel in partnership with his brother Prem
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 13 of 27
Kalra but Prem, has nothing to do with Eldorado bar.
The hotel managed to book only seven to eight rooms
on a normal day and Kalra was unable to pay the
salary to its 80 staff.He used to run two shows daily for two hours each
from 8:30 pm till midnight. Entry ticket here was `500
out of which `250 went towards entertainment tax.
Liquor was too served in the bar and was very
expensive – a bottle of beer cost `485.Customers were charged heavily for food. The bar has
a capacity 50 to 60 people. According to the officer,
prostitution was allowed in the hotel rooms itself and
big customers were given a better deal.The officer says, “If a customer liked any girl and
wanted her to dance again on his favourite song then
he was charged `2,500 for that particular song”.
Babbu himself used to prompt girls to make eye
contact with the customers so that they throw more
money. Every show yielded over `One lakh to Babbu.
He kept 50 percent himself, 10 percent was given to
the waiters and bouncers and rest was given to the
other staff. The girls used to keep some amount from
the tip money.According to the officer, Babbu himself lived in room
no.318 with a Russian girl. He told the police that the
girls themselves contacted him. Most of the girls are in
the age group of 20 to 24 except one Neelu (name
changed) who used to design dresses for the shows.Four girls are from Mumbai and were staying in hotel
rooms. Rest of these girls are from areas like CR Park,
Dwarka, Rohini, Lodhi Road and Laxmi Nagar of Delhi.
The Delhi girls also used to stay in hotel rooms and
indulge in prostitution. Babbu used hi-tech monitoring
gadgets like CCTV cameras and magic eyes which
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 14 of 27
were monitored from Room No.512 and 513 of the
hotel and if a local cop visited there then the set-up
was changed.”10. On 05.06.2006, in the newspaper „Dainik Jagran‟ the
news was published in Hindi and its translation reads as
under:-“13 Bar Girls arrested from Hotel
New Delhi, JS. Thirteen Bar Girls, dancing in
provocative and semi-nude condition, arrested
from Rajdoot Hotel at Mathura Road, by the
Crime Branch of Delhi Police on Saturday night.
Police has also arrested Manmohan alias Bablu
Kalra, a partner of the Hotel. With these arrests,
police has unearthed a racket of bringing
Mumbai Bar Dancers to Delhi and making them
to dance in Hotels.It has been reported, that police had received a
secret information that the Bar Girls, brought
from Mumbai, are being used to lure the
customers for prostitution by their stimulating
dances in the Rajdoot Hotel. For this purpose,
the Hotel is providing the rooms and other
facilities to its customer illegally. For reaching
on the dance floor, for obscene dancing with
music, the Hotel is charging Rupees Five
Hundred from each customer.Police had information that to avoid any kind of
raid, Hotel had got installed highly sophisticated
Cameras and other equipments at various places
in the Hotel including Entry Gate. It was also
learnt that Hotel owner has deputed Bouncers,
Wrestlers and additional security guards to stop
any raiding staff at the gate itself. This
information was found correct when these were
confirmed by the sources. Thereafter, one police
team, led by ACP P.P.Singh, conducted a raid at
Elderado Dance bar and arrested 13 Bar Girls
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 15 of 27
alongwith Manmohan. A case under various
sections for indulging in the prostitution has
been registered at Police Station Nizamuddin.
The investigations of case have been entrusted
to Inspector Ran Singh. On enquiry, it has been
learnt that these Bar Girls belong to poor families
and they are in this profession, since their minor
age, due to compelling circumstances. The Bar
Girls, in the age of 20 to 30 years, are in this
profession for years together. However, the
Patiala Court has granted Bail to these Bar Girls.”11. On 27.6.2006 as a follow up story in the newspaper
„Dainik Jagaran‟ a further publication was made in Hindi,
translated version thereof reads as under:-“Mumbai Bar Girls enticing the hearts of Delhians
Pradeep Kumar Singh, New Delhi
The love for Mumbai Bar Girls in Delhi is famous
these days. These Bar Girls, came in Delhi in the
search of jobs, are not only enticing the general
public but also becoming a headache for Delhi
Police. The number of girls reaching from
Mumbai to Delhi can be presumed with the fact
that more than one and a half dozen girls have
been arrested by the police within a period of
one month. As per sources, the numbers of these
Girls have reached in hundreds, who are staying
at Five Star Hotels, Kothis and Farm Houses.
It is well known that hundred of girls from Bihar,
Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujrat and Delhi
were earning from Dance Bars at Mumbai, but
the closing of Dance Bars in Mumbai, disturbed
their routine and they get their new shelter at
Delhi. There is another reason behind this, that
most of the customers staying with these girls in
Dance Bars and Five Star Hotels have connection
with Delhi also. Some have their business in
Delhi and some others used to visit Delhi oftenCrl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 16 of 27
for their business. The geographical condition of
Delhi also helps them. Some days back, the
Crime Branch of Delhi Police had arrested 11 Bar
Girls from Rajdoot Hotel of South Delhi in a raid.
All these Dancers were enticing the public of
Delhi after the closure of Dance Bars in Mumbai.
Arrests have been made from Greater Kailash,
Lajpat Nagar and Sarojini Nagar areas also.
Another Bar Dancer of Mumbai was arrested with
Raju Sansi, a notorious Bank Dacoit, by the
Special staff of South District, but she was
released as she had no criminal records. It is
surprising that Bar Girls have made connection
with criminals also. These criminals have
connection with Mumbai also. As per police, it is
a matter of concern. The gangs of criminals can
use these lucrative girls for kidnapping, loot etc.
crimes. Their Company is giving double benefits
to criminals. The Company of girls gives them
easy way to get shelter and also in spreading
their network. Police has information of all these
incidents, but they hesitate to nab them in the
absence of evidence. According to a senior
officer, despite the dismissal of one Sub-
Inspector of Crime Branch in the matter of Dance
Bar case and Police Commissioner‟s keeping it in
the category of an organized crime, the Station
House Officers are opting to close their eyes
from this side.Hite-outs of middlemen: Besides the posh
colonies of Greater Kailash, Defence Colony,
South Ex, Saket PVR, Vasant Vihar, Vasant Kunj
and Connaught Place, facility of dealing is
available on mobile phones also. After
finalization of deal, the Bar Girls are dropped and
picked-up in luxurious vehicles.”12. Alleging that the afore-noted news items were
defamatory of Hotel Rajdoot and its owner, Sh.Manmohan
Kalra, the stated owner of the hotel filed complaints before
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 17 of 27
the learned ACMM alleging that the accused named in the
complaints had committed offences punishable under
Section 499/500 IPC.13. I reproduce in a tabular form the name of the accused
as also the designation and the concerned petition filed by
the person concerned in respect to the 4 criminal
complaints filed by respondent No.2 pertaining to the news
items published in the Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar, The
Pioneer and Dainik Jagran. It reads as under:-(A) Newspaper- THE TIMES OF INDIA
Name of Designation Petition No.
Accused
Vineet Jain Managing Petitioner in
Director Crl.M.C.2111/2007 Arindam Sen Editor Petitioner No. 1 Gupta in Crl.M.C. 2704/2007 Balraj Arora Printer and Petitioner No. 2 Publisher in Crl.M.C. (Bennett 2704/2007 Coleman & Co. Ltd.) (B) Newspaper- DAINIK BHASKAR Name of Designation Petition No. Accused Ramesh Editor Crl.M.C. Chander 2863/200 Agarwal 7 Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 18 of 27 (C) Newspaper- DAINIK JAGARAN Name of Deisgnation Petition No. Accused Mahinder Chairman cum (Petitioner Mohan Gupta Managing Crl. M.C. Director 182/2008). Sanjay Gupta Editor Petitioner No. 1 Crl. M.C. 1052/2008 Pradeep Kumar Reporter Petitioner No. 2 Crl. M.C. 1052/2008 (D) Newspaper- PIONEER Name of Designation Petition No Accused Durbar Ganguly Joint Managing Petitioner Director Crl.M.C.3082/2007 Chandan Mitra Printer and Petitioner publisher Crl.M.C.3083/2007 Manoj CG Reporter, PTI Petitioner in Crl.M.C.1224/2008 Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 19 of 2714. Defamation has been defined as a false statement
which has the tendency to disparage the good name or
reputation of another person. Strictly speaking, in terms of
the statute, as per Section 499 Indian Penal Code, the
offence of defamation consists of three vital components
which can be categorised as under:-(i) Making or publishing any imputation
concerning any person.(ii) Such imputation must have been made by
words either written or spoken or by visible
representation.(iii) Such imputation must be made with the
intention to cause harm or with the knowledge
or having reasons to believe that it will harm the
reputation of the person concerned.15. Petitioners contend that apart from the reporter, the
editor, printer and publisher would be liable if a scandalous
publication relates to a newspaper and additionally would
urge that if a newspaper truthfully reports a news item,
pertaining to a fact which is of public interest, nobody can
be prosecuted for the offence of defamation.16. The complainant alleges that the news items are per
se defamatory and that all accused would be liable.17. A fair reporting pertaining to a matter of public
concern, without insinuations and innuendos i.e. a news
item containing statements of true facts is not actionable for
the offence of criminal defamation.18. I have a relook at the news reports. They have been
extracted by me in paras 6 to 11 above.Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 20 of 27
19. Pertaining to the newspaper „The Times of India‟ the
news item is extracted in para 6 above. The contents of the
FIR have been noted in para 2 and 3 above. The press
release has been noted in para 4 above.20. The news item simply publishes the fact of the raid
conducted and 13 dance bar girls being apprehended. The
nature of activity as per the FIR at the dance bar has been
reported. Similar is the position with the news item
published in the 3 other newspapers.21. I would highlight that the source on which the
publishers acted was a proper source i.e. the police. The 9 th
exception to Section 499 IPC is prima facie attracted. There
are no innuendos in the publications. A fact pertaining to an
FIR being registered with reference to the activities found to
be carried out from Hotel Rajdoot as recorded in the FIR has
been published. The FIR was made public by the police
along with a press release.22. Pertaining to the liability, primarily a reporter is
responsible for his act of defamation and vicarious liability is
fastened only on the printer, publisher and editor of the
newspaper as held by me in my judgment dated 21.9.2007
disposing of Crl.M.C. No.35/2005 „Mrs.Shobhana Bhartia &
Ors. vs. NCT of Delhi & Anr.‟. Thus, unless the contrary is
proved the persons declared as printer, publisher and editor
of the newspaper who would be presumed to be responsible
for the contents of the newspaper on the question whether
any person other than the printer, publisher and editor can
be prosecuted for a defamatory article, apart from the
reporter, needs a few decisions to be noted:-Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 21 of 27
“(i) State of Maharashtra v R.B. Chowdhari, AIR
1968 SC 110:- The public prosecutor filed a
complaint under Section 500 IPC against four
persons who were members of the Editorial Board
of a Marathi weekly named “Maharashtra”. One of
the accused, Sudhakar Gopal Madane, had filed
the declaration in the prescribed form under the
Act describing himself as the editor, printer and
publisher of the newspaper. The particular copy
of the Maharashtra in which the alleged
defamatory article appeared bore the name of
one Madane as the printer, publisher and editor
of the newspaper. It also showed on the front
page that the Editorial Board consisted of Madane
and three other accused. The question arose
whether the members of Editorial Board could be
prosecuted for defamatory article. Adverting to
Section 7, the Supreme Court held that:-“7. The term ‘editor’ is defined in the Act to
mean a person who controls the selection of
the matter that is published in a newspaper.
Where there is mentioned an editor is a
person who is responsible for selection of
the material. Section 7 raises the
presumption in respect of such a person.
The name of that person has to be printed
on the copy of the newspaper and in the
present case the name of Madane
admittedly was printed as the Editor of the
Maharashtra in the copy of the Maharashtra
which contained the defamatory article. The
declaration in Form I which has been
produced before us shows the name of
Madane not only as the printer and
publisher but also as the editor. In our
opinion the presumption will attach to
Madane as having selected the material for
publication in the newspaper. It may not be
out of place to note that Madane admitted
that he had written this article. In the
circumstances not only the presumption
cannot be drawn against the others who had
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 22 of 27
not declared themselves as editors of the
newspaper but it is also fair to leave them
out because they had no concern with the
publishing of the article in question. On the
whole therefore the order of discharge
made by the learned single Judge appears
to be proper in the circumstances of the
case and we see no reason to interfere.”(ii) T.K.S.Muthukoya v Haji C.H. Mohammad
Koya, (1979) 2 SCC 8:-Question before Supreme
Court was whether the Chief Editor of a
newspaper can be prosecuted for publication of a
defamatory article. In para 34 of the decision,
Supreme Court observed as under:-“34. From the facts established above, it is
manifest that the petitioner has miserably
failed to prove either that the appellant was
the editor of the paper or that he was
performing the functions, duties or
shouldering the responsibilities of the
editor. It is obvious that a presumption
under Section 7 of the Press Act could be
drawn only if the person concerned was an
editor within the meaning of Section 1 of
the Press Act. Where however a person
does not fulfil the conditions of Section 1 of
the Press Act and does not perform the
functions of an editor whatever may be his
description or designation, the provisions of
the Press Act would have no application….”(iii) K.M. Mathew v State of Kerela & Anr., 1992
CriLJ 3779:- In relation to prosecution of Chief
Editor of a newspaper for publication of a
defamatory news article, Supreme Court
observed as under:-“9. In the instant case there is no averment
against the Chief Editor except the motive
attributed to him. Even the motive alleged
is general and vague. The complainant
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 23 of 27
seems to rely upon the presumption under
Section 7 of the Press and Registration of
Books Act, 1867 (‘the Act’). But Section 7 of
the Act has no applicability for a person
who is simply named as ‘Chief Editor’. The
presumption under Section 7 is only against
the person whose name is printed as
‘editor’ as required under Section 5(1).
There is a mandatory (though rebuttable)
presumption that the person whose name
is printed as ‘Editor’ is the editor of every
portion of that issue of the newspaper of
which a copy is produced. Section 1(1) of
the Act defines ‘Editor’ to mean ‘the person
who controls the selection of the matter
that is published in a newspaper’. Section 7
raises the presumption in respect of a
person who is named as the editor and
printed as such on every copy of the
newspaper. The Act does not recognise any
other legal entity for raising the
presumption. Even if the name of the Chief
Editor is printed in the newspaper, there is
no presumption against him under Section
7 of the Act. See State of Maharashtra v
R.B. Chowdhari, AIR 1968 SC 110; D.P.
Mishra v Kamal Narain Sharma & Ors, AIR
1970 SC 856; Narasingh Charan Mohanty v
Surendra Mohanty, AIR 1974 SC 47; Haji
C.H. Mohammad Koya v T.K.S.M.A.
Muthukoya, AIR 1979 SC 154.10. It is important to state that for a
Magistrate to take cognizance of the
offence as against the Chief Editor, there
must be positive averments in the
complaint of knowledge of the
objectionable character of the matter. The
complaint in the instant case does not
contain any such allegation. In the absence
of such allegation, the Magistrate was
justified in directing that the complaint so
far as it relates to the Chief Editor could not
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 24 of 27
be proceeded with. To ask the Chief Editor
to undergo the trial of the case merely on
the ground of the issue of process would be
oppressive. No person should be tried
without a prima facie case. The view taken
by the High Court is untenable. The appeal
is accordingly allowed. The order of the
High Court is set aside.”(iv) Sardar Nihal Singh v Arjan Das, 1983 CrLJ
777:- A learned Single Judge of this court was
considering whether the Chairman and Executive
Editor of a newspaper could be prosecuted for
publication of a defamatory article. With
reference to Chairman, it was observed as
under:-“Needless to say that as Chairman of the
Company Shri Goenka can be held liable for
the publication of the offending news items
only if it is shown that he was somehow
concerned with the publication of the
defamatory news items. It is highly doubtful
that he can be asked to answer the charge
of defamation merely because he
happened to be the Chairman of the
Company owning the newspaper without
there being any further evidence as
regards his participation in the actual
management and administration of the
affairs of the company. Intention on the
part of the accused to harm the reputation
or the knowledge or reasonable belief that
an imputation will harm the reputation of
the persons concerned is an essential
ingredient of offence under S. 400, IPC but
such evidence is totally missing in the
instant case. Under the circumstances the
impugned order as regards Shri Goenka
cannot be sustained on this short ground.”Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 25 of 27
After referring to Section 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the
Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, the
learned Judge added:-“However, it is difficult to draw such a
presumption in the case of other petitioners
viz., Arun Shorie, petitioner No. 2 and A. P.
Dhar petitioner No. 4. Their names do not
find place in the declaration printed on the
newspaper itself and there is no iota of
evidence to show that they are in any
manner concerned with the collection,
control or selection of the matter printed in
the newspaper. Their designations as
Executive Editor/Editor of the Express News
Service will not per se warrant an inference
that they are in any way responsible for the
selection of the material. An authority for
this view may be found in the State of
Maharashtra v. R. B. Chowdhari, AIR 1968
SC 110.”
23. From the afore-noted judicial pronouncement, it can
safely be said that besides persons declared as editor,
printer and publisher of a newspaper, only such persons
could be prosecuted for an action of defamation against
whom specific and clear allegations have been made in the
complaint that either he was responsible for selection of the
defamatory matter or had personal knowledge about the
contents of the defamatory matter. In addition, it must also
be averred in the complaint that such person had the
intention to harm or had knowledge or reason to believe
that the imputation will harm the reputation of the
complainant. The chairman or the managing director of a
company owning a newspaper is neither the editor, nor the
printer, nor the publisher and therefore no presumption can
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 26 of 27
be drawn against the holder of these offices even though
they are, by reason of the office held by them, in charge of
and responsible to the company for the conduct of its
business.
24. I do not find any such pleadings in the complaint
against Vineet Jain, Mahinder Mohan Gupta and Durbur
Ganguly and thus qua them the complaints are liable to be
quashed on the sole ground that merely because Vineet Jain
is the managing director of Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd.,
Mahinder Mohan Gupta is the Chairman-cum-Managing
Director of the company publishing the newspaper „Dainik
Jagran‟ and Durbur Ganguly is the Joint Managing Director of
the company publishing the newspaper „The Pioneer‟, on the
reason of the office held by them, they cannot be made
liable.
25. Qua the rest I hold that the news items contain no
innuendos. A fact of an FIR being registered with the
contents thereof has been published. The publication of the
news item pertains to a matter of public interest. The
publication is a true and a faithful report of a fact. I
highlight that the reporters have not carried out any
„investigative journalism‟.
26. The petitions are allowed. The complaints impugned
in each petition as also the summoning order are quashed.
27. No costs.
(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
JUDGE
October 10, 2011
dk
Crl.M.C.No.2111/07 & conn.matters Page 27 of 27
