Back
MADHAV J. JAMDAR
Dhyandev Kachruji Wankhede – Appellant
Versus
Nawab Malik – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Arshad Shaikh, learned Senior Counsel for the Plaintiff and Mr. Atul Damle, learned Senior Counsel for the Defendant.
2. At the outset Mr. Shaikh, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff clarified that at this stage the Plaintiff is only pressing for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause 5 (c) of the Interim Application. The said prayer clause 5(c) is reproduced herein below for ready reference :-
"(c) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Interim Application, this Hon 'ble Court be pleased to pass an order of injunction preventing and / or restraining the Defendant, his agents, servants, authorized representatives, his party members and all others acting under and on his instructions from publishing, writing, speaking in any media, including electronic media and the social media handles, or publishing in any manner whatsoever any content / material which is defamatory about the Plaintiff and / or his family members. "
3. Before considering the rival submissions it will be necessary to set out the pleadings of the parties. The Plaintiff 's case as set out in the plaint is as follows:-
"(a) The Plaintiff is retired Government
The judgment established the balance between freedom of speech and expression and the right to reputation, and granted interim relief to protect the reputation of the plaintiffs.
The judgment establishes that defamatory statements can be restrained by injunction if they threaten irreparable harm to a person's reputation, balancing free speech with the right to reputation.
The judgment established the need to protect reputation from unsubstantiated allegations and highlighted the balance between freedom of speech and the right to safeguard reputation.
The court ruled that the right to freedom of speech takes precedence over defamation claims unless a strong prima facie case is established, underscoring the necessity to balance fundamental rights.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the accused persons were entitled to the benefit of exception 1 to 9 of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, as the imputation was made in....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
