2022 PLP 3 (YLRN)

FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J.

The applicant has impugned the order dated 29-05-2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Karachi South, whereby she refused to entertain a private complaint bearing No. 193/2018 by holding that the applicant cannot proceed under general penal laws when alternate remedy is available.

2. The case of the applicant is that he considers some telecast material as defamatory for which he intends to put the criminal law in motion by filing a private complaint. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are the anchor person and producer of those telecast material on a news channel known as 'News One'. The said news channel is said to be related to a corporate body under the name and style of Messrs Airwaves Media Group (Pvt.) Ltd and the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are respectively the Chairman and CEO of the said body. While disposing of the criminal complaint filed by the applicant, the learned trial judge came to conclusion that since a remedy is given under the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 (hereinafter referred as PEMRA Ordinance) by filing a complaint before the 'Council of Complaints' established under section 26 of PEMRA Ordinance, which is the basic forum; therefore, a private complaint cannot be filed. The learned judge also came to conclusion that since the PEMRA Ordinance is a special law as such its provisions will prevail.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in case of libel and slander, the general penal law of the land has provided punishment for felonious persons by filing a private complaint. According to him, the right of action to an aggrieved person under the penal provision cannot be taken away.

4. The learned DPG and AAG submit that the private complaint cannot be dismissed on the ground that some mechanism has been provided for redressal of his grievance under the PEMRA Ordinance.

5. While passing the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has declined to take any action in respect of a private complaint filed by the applicant on the ground that an alternate mechanism has been provided under the PEMRA Ordinance. I am of the view that the approach of the learned judge is contrary to the principle of jurisprudence. The PEMRA Ordinance may have some penal sections or provides some forum for lodging a complaint against any electronic media but the same cannot derogate the general penal laws. I am of the view that no special law can declare a 'malum prohibitum' as non-offence unless the same is omitted from the book of statutes. As long as, sections 499 and 500 are available in the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, which provide that a person who considers himself aggrieved by any publication, broadcast and telecast, may approach the courts of competent jurisdiction for initiating a criminal proceeding against the wrongdoer. It is noteworthy that while disposing of the criminal complaint filed by the applicant, the learned judge did not speak regarding the merits of the case and limit herself about the maintainability of the complaint in the backdrop of the provisions of the PEMRA Ordinance; therefore, the instant criminal revision application is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the lower forum for passing an appropriate speaking order after hearing the parties concerned.

6. The above are the reasons for my short order dated 08.07.2019, whereby the instant criminal revision application was allowed. SA/S-138/Sindh Application allowed.