Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 28 (0.29 seconds)
Subhash Desai vs Sharad J. Rao on 31 March, 1994 cites

Ahaji C. H. Mohammad Koya vs T. K. S. M. A. Muthukoya on 12 September, 1978

27. On behalf of the appellant, a stand was taken before this Court that merely because appellant was the publisher of Samana he shall not be deemed to have, published the news item and in this connection reference was made to the Press Act and Rules framed thereunder. It was urged that names of the editor, printer and publisher on the newspaper in question, only raises a presumption, but contrary can be proved in facts and circumstances of a case. Reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Haji C. H. Mohammad Koya v. T.K.S.M.A. Muthukoya8. But the remarkable aspect of the present case is that the appellant admitted that he had published the report aforesaid in the Samana on 15-2-1990, as alleged by the respondent. He also asserted, that the facts stated in the publication in question, were correct. He said in the written statement that "he published a news item submitted to him by his news reporter.... This respondent in good faith published the said news item submitted to him by news reporter". The appellant categorically denied in the written statement "that the report published in the Newspaper Samana on 15-2- 1990, was a false and/or fraudulent report...... Having admitted in the written statement that he had published that news item, in his evidence he stated:
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 111 - S M Ali - Full Document

Kumara Nand vs Brijmohan Lal Sharma on 29 November, 1966

In the case of Kumara Nand v. Brijmohan Lal Sharma9 it was pointed out that the onus to prove the charge of a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) was on the election petitioner, but the onus on him to prove that the maker of the statement believed it to be false or believed it not to be true, is very light and can be discharged by complaining candidate swearing to that effect; once that is done, the burden shifts to the candidate making false statement of fact to show what was his belief. Wanchoo, J. (as he then was) speaking for the Court said:
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 19 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document

Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao vs E.V. Alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil And ... on 19 November, 1993

Recently in the case of Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. E. V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil10 it was pointed out that it is very difficult for the election petitioner to prove by any direct evidence that the person, who is alleged to have made a 9 (1967) 2 SCR 127: AIR 1967 SC 808 10 (1994) 1 SCC 682: JT (1993) 6 SC 345 461 false statement or published the same, believed it to be false or believed it to be not true, because belief of the maker is related to the state of mind of the maker which can be found to have been established only on basis of the surrounding circumstances and the materials on the record. When a charge has been levelled that while publishing the statement of fact which was false, the appellant either believed it to be false or did not believe it to be true, he should have come out with the justification for publishing such a news item. In the instant case, no justification has been given by the appellant, except what has already been mentioned above, that the news item was shown to him by the reporter while he was in hurry and he told him to print and publish the same after verifying the correctness thereof. This statement in his evidence runs counter to or is at variance with the statement made by him in his written statement, admitting that he had published that news item, submitted to him by his news reporter. He also denied that the said news report was false, meaning thereby that it was a correct report. But, at the stage of evidence, neither the appellant has asserted nor any witness on his behalf has come forward to state before the court that any such incident, as mentioned in the news item, had actually happened. In such a situation, the irresistible conclusion is that the respondent has been able to establish that the publication by the appellant of the statement of the fact regarding his personal conduct at the Sankalpasiddhi Ganesh Mandir was not only false, but the appellant believed it to be false or did not believe it to be true. In view of the serious nature of the allegations published, it was not even urged before us that they do not relate to the personal character or conduct of the appellant or that such publication was not reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospect of the election of the respondent. Once it is proved that the aforesaid news item was published by the appellant and it was false and the appellant believed it to be false or did not believe it to be true; then certainly it related to the personal character or conduct of the respondent, calculated to prejudice his prospects at election. Because of that publication, the appellant has not only committed a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) but also under sub-section (3-A) of Section 123. By publishing the news item, he shall be deemed to have promoted feeling of enmity and hatred between different classes of citizens on ground of religion for the furtherance of his prospects at the election and for prejudicially affecting the prospects of the election of the respondent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 64 - J S Verma - Full Document
1   2 3 Next