The Jammu and Kashmir High Court in the matter of Sheikh Khalid Jahangir vs Nayeem Akhtar quashed the complaint against the petitioner and held that every citizen has a right to comment on those acts of public men which concern him as a citizen provided that such comment does not have malice.

The petitioner had accused the respondent of corruption and favouritism and wrote a letter to the governor which was made public and in consequence, the respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner for defamation.

The court observed that for it to constitute an offense of defamation the person must make an amputation concerning any person with the intention that such imputation will harm the reputation of the person and any imputation made without an intention to harm the reputation of the person will not constitute an offense of defamation.

The court observed that the allegations against the Public servants cannot be considered defamatory without proving malice and the court highlighted that every citizen has a right to comment on acts of public man which concern them provided that the commentary does not contain malice and the intention to slander. 

And in light of the above observations the court observed that the offense under section 499 is not made out and quashed the complaint against the petitioner.

Quashed the complaint against the petitioner and held that every citizen has a right to comment on those acts of public men which concerns him as a citizen provided that such comment does not have malice. 

The petitioner had accused the respondent of corruption and favouritism and wrote a letter to the governor which was made public and in consequence, the respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner for defamation.

The court observed that for it to constitute an offense of defamation the person must make an amputation concerning any person with the intention that such imputation will harm the reputation of the person and any imputation made without an intention to harm the reputation of the person will not constitute an offense of defamation.

The court observed that the allegations against the Public servants cannot be considered defamatory without proving malice and the court highlighted that every citizen has a right to comment on acts of public man which concern them provided that the commentary does not contain malice and the intention to slander. 

And in light of the above observations the court observed that the offense under section 499 is not made out and quashed the complaint against the petitioner.