Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.25 seconds)

Akshay Kumar vs State Of Raj And Anr on 4 August, 2021

5. Learned Senior Counsel has further contended that for the offence of defamation under Section 499 IPC, the alleged defamatory content should be such, which may cause defamation (Downloaded on 05/08/2021 at 10:14:16 PM) (3 of 6) [CRLMP-6165/2017] of a particular person or persons whose identity can be established. In this case, the complainant individually has not been defamed in any manner. Besides this, the film is a work of fiction and an Artist has to execute his skilfull role and he has no personal opinion or intention to defame any one. The impugned order of cognizance is also violative of fundamental rights of freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was obliged to ponder over all aspects of the matter, but the impugned order itself indicates that the cognizance has been taken in cursory manner without due application of mind. Thus the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and liable to be quashed and set side. Reliance has been placed on G. Narasimhan, G. Kasturi and K. Gopalan Vs. T.V. Chokkappa [(1972)2 SCC 680], Anand Bazar Patrika (P) Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal [2005 Cri.L.J. 1126], Smt. Aruna Asaf Ali Vs. Purna Narayan Sinha [1984 Cri.L.J. 1121], Government Advocate Vs. Gopal Bandu Das [AIR 1922 Pat 101], Shilpesh Chaudhary Vs. Union of India [W.P.(C) No.1492/2013 decided on 8-3-2013 by Division Bench of Delhi High Court], Shah Rukh Khan Vs. State of Rajsthan [RLW 2008(1) Raj. 809], Asha Parekh Vs. State of Bihar [1977 Cri.L.J. 21], Narottamdas L. Shah Vs. Patel Maganbhai Revabha [1984 GLH 687], M.J. Akbar Vs. Nurul Alam [Manu/WB/0444/1985], Mattel Inc. Vs. Ms. Aman Bijal Mehta [CS (Comm) 803/2017, order dated 22-11-2017 by the High Court of New Delhi], Raj Kapoor Vs. Laxman [(1980)2 SCC 175], Priya Singh Paul Vs. Madhur Bhandarkar [Special Leave to Appeal No.19194/2017 decided on 27-7-2017], Prakash Jha (Downloaded on 05/08/2021 at 10:14:16 PM) (4 of 6) [CRLMP-6165/2017] Productions Vs. Union of India [(2011)8 SCC 372], Pepsi Food Ltd. Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate [(1998)5 SCC 749], Mahendra Singh Dhoni Vs. Yerraguntla Shyamsundar [AIR 2017 SC 2392], Mallika Sherawat Vs. State of Maharashtra [2015 SCC Online Bom 5912], S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010)5 SCC 600], Nachiketa Walhekar Vs. Central Board of film Certification [Writ Petition (Civil) No.1119/2017 decided on 16-11-2017 by Supreme Court], Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi [2013 SCC Online Del 6], Sanjay Leela Bhansali Vs. State of Rajasthan [2018 RLW (Raj) 513].
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - S K Sharma - Full Document
1