Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.46 seconds)Section 500 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs Union Of India Ministry Of Law Through ... on 2 July, 2015
In Subramanian Swamy Vs. Union of
India, Ministry of Law and Others (supra) the Hon'ble
Apex Court dealt with the subject in detail and in
paragraphs 119, 132, 133, 135, 168, 179, 184, 185,
191 and 209 held as under:
Chaman Lal vs The State Of Punjab on 6 March, 1970
In Chaman Lal v. State of
Punjab, (1970) 1 SCC 590, the Court has held
that in order to come within the First Exception
to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code it has to
be established that what has been imputed
concerning the respondent is true and the
publication of the imputation is for the public
good. The onus of proving these two ingredients,
namely, truth of the imputation and the
publication of the imputation for the public good,
is on the accused.
Romesh Roy vs The King on 10 September, 1948
In Ramesh Roy Vs. The King (supra), relied
on by the learned counsel for the accused, the High
Court of Calcutta dealt with eighth exception to
Section 499 of IPC and held that the accused need not
prove the allegations made by him to be true. In the
said case, a representation was submitted to the
Deputy Commissioner of Police making allegations
against the complainant, that he is leading immoral
life. Under such circumstances, the High Court held
that when such accusation was made in good faith,
while filing representation to the authorized persons,
it falls squarely under eighth exception to Section 499
of IPC. But in the present case, the contention taken
17
by the accused does not fall under eighth exception,
since the article in question was published in a
magazine but not a representation submitted to an
authorized person.