On the eve of National Election in 2018, Barrister Mainul Hosein, a former advisor to the Caretaker Government, appeared in a live TV Talk Show. He called a women journalist ‘I want to believe you characterless’. His comment agitated many women rights activists. As many as fourteen (14) defamation cases were lodged countrywide against Mr. Hosein. Thereafter, he was arrested. He appointed Khandkar Mahbub Hossein, Senior Advocate, his counsel.

Mr. Khandkar Mahbub Hossain instructed us to examine the case records and the lucas standi in lodging a defamation proceeding. As per section 198 of the CrPC, only the aggrieved person can initiate a defamation case. Accordingly, all the proceedings against Mr. Hosein are liable to be set aside except the one by the aggrieved journalist herself.

We found a number of judicial pronouncements in this regard. Notably, in the case of Vijay Vishwanath vs. Suresh Raghunathrao, 2000 (5) BomCR 402, son was not held to be aggrieved person for his father’s defamation. In the case of Ganesh Anand Chela vs. Swami Divyanand, 1980 CriLJ 1036, it was held that for the defamation of a Guru, disciple is not a person aggrieved.

In the following case, Netaji Subhas Chandra was vilified as ‘traitor’ and ‘Japanese quisling’ in a Mumbai based magazine in 1962, long after the demise of Netaji. Then, a defamation case was lodged by his nephew. The High Court of Calcutta held the nephew well competent to lodge the defamation case for two reasons; (1) Netaji was presumed to be dead long before and (2) the case was lodged by a family member of the defamed. The Court maintained conviction and sentence.