Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.60 seconds)

Smt Sushma Rani vs Sri H N Nagaraja Rao on 1 October, 2020

14. Learned counsel for the accused submitting that the statements made by the accused in the matrimonial case as per Ex.P-4 and Ex.P-1 do not amount to publication, has relied upon a judgment of the High Court of Madras in the case of J. Gnana Kumar Vs. Joy Kanmani reported in LAWS (MAD)-2007-11- 513, wherein the respondent wife had instituted a private complaint against her husband for the alleged offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC. The Madras High Court was pleased to observe that, one of the basic legal requirements of Section 499 of IPC is that, the imputation should be either made directly to the knowledge of third parties, or the same should be published to the knowledge of the third parties. However, in the case before it, even as per the allegations made in the complaint, it observed that, the imputations cannot be considered as published either directly or indirectly since they were pleadings filed Crl.R.P.No.152/2014 c/w.Crl.R.P.No.1358/2010 20 before the Court of Law which are not public documents to which anybody can have free access. The Madras High Court, however, opined in the same case that, though the pleadings are handled by the Court staff and copy is furnished to the respondent therein, which can be made public even by the respondent, but those things would not amount to publication by the accused.
Karnataka High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 2 - H P Sastry - Full Document

G.Boopathi vs Lenin Balu on 24 March, 2022

11.Learned counsel for the petitioner pressed into service judgment reported in 2007 (7) CTCOL 445 J.Gnana Kumar Vs. Joy Kanmani, and the order in Crl.R.C.No.784 of 2009 Geetha Vs. A.K.Dhamodharan, for the proposition that pleadings filed before the Court of law are not public documents. As per Section 499 I.P.C., publication should be made by the accused to third parties. When it is absent, complaint is liable to be quashed. Only after the disposal of the civil case, it would be known that 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.29987 of 2015 whether the allegations made in the plaint are defamatory or not.

G.Boopathi vs Lenin Balu on 24 March, 2022

11.Learned counsel for the petitioner pressed into service judgment reported in 2007 (7) CTCOL 445 J.Gnana Kumar Vs. Joy Kanmani, and the order in Crl.R.C.No.784 of 2009 Geetha Vs. A.K.Dhamodharan, for the proposition that pleadings filed before the Court of law are not public documents. As per Section 499 I.P.C., publication should be made by the accused to third parties. When it is absent, complaint is liable to be 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.29987 of 2015 quashed. Only after the disposal of the civil case, it would be known that whether the allegations made in the plaint are defamatory or not.
1