HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Rahul Gandhi – Appellant
Versus
Purnesh Ishwerbhai Modi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal complaint filed for defamation due to speech. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against the conviction and how due process was allegedly compromised. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court observations on the necessity for evidence and the implications of public figures' claims. (Para 15 , 24 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 54) |
| 4. importance of the right to reputation and balancing it against free speech. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 56 , 62) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner herein has filed the present criminal revision application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 (hereinafter be referred to as ‘the Code’) for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2023 passed below application at Exhibit 5 by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal Appeal No.254 of 2023 and to stay the order of conviction against the appellant dated 23.03.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case 18712/2019.
2. Brief facts of the present case are in nutshell as under:-
2.1 It is alleged that the petition
Vijay Dhanuka y. Najima Mamiaj
Anvar P.V. vy. PK Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 (Para 7 & 14 @Pg. No. 243 and 246
Abhijit Pawar v. Hemant Madhukar Nimbatkar and Anr.
Allahabad Bank v. Deepak Kumar Bhola [(1997) 4 SCC 1 : 1997 SCC (L&S) 897]
Baleshwar Singh v. District Magistrate and Collector [AIR 1959 All 71]
Babu Singh and others v. State of U.P.
B.R.Kapur v. State of Tamil Nadu
Bishnu Deo Shaw v. West Bengal (1979) 3 SCC 714
Charu Khurana and others v. Union of India and others
Chameli Singh and others v. State of U.P. and another
Central Bureau of Investigation
Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi and others
Golak Nath and Others V/s. State of Punjab and Another (AIR 1967 SC 1643)
Haridas Das v. Usha Rani Banik and others
K. Prabhakaran v. P. Jayarajan
Navjot Singh Siddu Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2007) 2 SCC 574
Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana [(1996) 4 SCC 17 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 583 : AIR 1996 SC 3300
Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Naraang & ors. {1995 (2) SCC 513
Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Ltd.
State of Maharashtra v. Gajanan & Anr.
Shyam Narain Pandey vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2014) 8 SCC 909
Sunil Todi v. State of Gujarat
Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 221)
Shyam Narain Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 8 SCC 909
Sushil Kumar Singhal Vs. Regional Manager
Salman Khan v. State of Rajasthan
Sahib Singh Mehra v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra
State of Tamil Nadu v. A.Jaganathan
S.P. Mittal v. Union of India and others
State of Rajasthan v. Salman Salim Khan
(1) Defamation – ”BJP” is a determinate and identifiable body and complaint for defamation under Section 500 IPC is maintainable.(2) Defamation – Right of a person against whom offence of defamation ....
Statements made without evidence that harm a public official's reputation can constitute defamation under IPC, justifying criminal proceedings.
The court held that a news report published in good faith, including the complainant's version, does not constitute defamation under IPC Sections 499-501.
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.