Complaints arising from the same allegedly defamatory publication may be clubbed for trial.

The petitioner, a journalist and publisher, challenged multiple private complaints arising from an article titled “Medara Janagada Special Bulletin,” published in September 2024.

The complaints alleged defamation in connection with the article’s statements about alleged misappropriation and other activities of a trust.

Proceedings were pending in Sirsi, Mundgod, Chitradurga, and Hubballi.

The petitioner sought to have the cases consolidated and tried at Hubballi, citing the common subject matter and his health and difficulty travelling.

The High Court allowed the petition and clubbed the Sirsi, Mundgod, and Chitradurga cases for trial at Hubballi; the Hubballi complaint was not included in the operative consolidation order.

The petitioner invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and the Court referred to Section 206 BNSS—the provision corresponding to Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—as governing a question arising where two or more courts have taken cognizance of the same offence.

The Court relied on Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, (2016) 7 SCC 221, which explains that the proper forum in multiple defamation proceedings depends on the facts and the territorial-jurisdiction provisions, and that the High Court may determine the forum where courts in different jurisdictions have taken cognizance of the same offence.

The respondents’ contention that transfer is governed by Section 447 BNSS was recorded, but the Court did not separately analyse or decide it.

The Court noted that the complaints concerned the same article and alleged substantially similar defamatory statements, and that the complainants were connected with the same trust.

Relying on the principle that the High Court may determine the appropriate forum where multiple courts have taken cognizance of the same offence, it concluded that the Sirsi, Mundgod, and Chitradurga proceedings should be tried together at Hubballi.

The order did not set out a separate analysis of the respondents’ objections concerning the different stages of the cases, the complainants’ choice of forum, or the applicable transfer provision.

The cases pending in Sirsi (PCR No. 213/2024), Mundgod (PCR No. 107/2024, C.C. No. 775/2024), and Chitradurga (PCR No. 761/2024, C.C. No. 731/2026) were ordered to be tried by the IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi.

The petitioner was directed to cooperate and avoid unnecessary adjournments, and the trial court was directed to dispose of the matters expeditiously in accordance with law.