' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---The petitioner/defendant impugns the appellate decree, dated 16-6- 2001, whereby the decree of the learned trial Court, dated 28-2-2001 was set aside and a sum of Rs,9000 was awarded to the respondent/ plaintiff by way of damages.
2. The facts of this case are simple. The petitioner/defendant was an accused in case F.I.R.
No,292/90, dated 6-8-1990 registered under sections 381, 411, 406 and 420, P.P.C. On the complaint of the respondent/plaintiff' Mian Anjum Yousuf. In the said case while recording his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C., the petitioner made certain assertions against the respondent/plaintiff. It is these assertions which the respondent found defamatory and filed a suit for recovery of Rs,24,000 as damages on the ground that his reputation had been adversely affected by the aforesaid statement. The learned Trial Court dismissed the suit on 28-2-2001 holding that the statement had been made during the course of judicial proceedings and was protected. As such, it was held that no suit was maintainable.
3. The respondent/plaintiff, feeling aggrieved, filed an appeal which, as noted above, was partly allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the case titled Mahomed Alam v. Crown (PLD 1954 Sindh 70) to contend that the learned appellate Court has failed to recognize the well- established principle of law set out in the aforesaid precedent. I have gone through the cited precedent which supports the plea of the petitioner that any statement or assertion which is made before any Court, cannot give rise to an action for libel or slander. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is well founded. In the circumstances, it is clear that the appellate decree is a result of illegal exercise of jurisdiction and, therefore, is not sustainable. The same is, therefore, set aside. As a consequence, the dismissal of the suit by the learned trail Court vide decree, dated 28- 2-2001 stands restored.