Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 19 in Indian Divorce Act, 1869 [Entire Act]
Tiruvengada Mudali vs Tripurasundari Ammal on 15 February, 1926
In Tiruvengadda Mudali v. Tripurasundari Ammal(1) a Full
Bench of the Madras High Court observed that the exceptions
to s. 499 I.P. Code must be regarded as exhaustive as to the
cases which they purport to cover ,and recourse cannot be
had to the English common law to 'add new grounds of
exception to those contained in the statute. A person
making libelous statements in his complaint filed in
court is not absolutely protected in a criminal proceeding
for defamation, for under the Eighth Exception ,and the
illustration to s. 499 the statements are privileged only
when they are made in good faith. There is therefore
authority for the proposition that in determining the
criminality of an act under the Indian Penal Code the courts
will not extend the scope of special exceptions by resorting
to the rule peculiar to EngLish common law that the husband
and wife are regarded as one.
Section 19 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Indian Divorce Act, 1869
Article 353 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 18 in Indian Divorce Act, 1869 [Entire Act]
Abdul Khadar vs Taib Begum on 29 November, 1956
In Abdul Khadar v. Taib Begum(5) the Madras High Court
again held that there is no presumption of law in India that
a wife and husband constitute one person for the purpose of
criminal law, and therefore the English common law doctrine
of absolute privilege cannot prevail in India.
It must be remembered that the Indian Penal Code
exhaustively codifies the law relating to offences with
which it deals and
(1) [1888] 20 Q.B.D. 635.
1