SC to examine whether defamation in IPC unreasonably restrictive

Image
IANS New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 08 2015 | 12:22 AM IST

The Supreme Court will examine whether Indian Penal Code (IPC)'s section 499 relating to defamation and section 500 providing for punishment for defamation travelled beyond the constitutional provision imposing reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech and expression.

A bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Prafulla C. Pant on Tuesday decided to examine whether sections 499 and 500 went beyond the reasonable restrictions imposed under article 19(2) of the constitution as number of senior lawyers expressed differing views on it.

The issue surfaced in the course of the hearing of a petition by Bharatiya Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy who has challenged the constitutional validity of sections 499 and 500 and section 199(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which were taken recourse to by Tamil Nadu government in slapping defamation cases against him for making comments critical of the then chief minister J. Jayalalithaa.

The apex court on October 30, 2014, had suspended defamation proceedings in five cases initiated by the Tamil Nadu government against Swamy.

The court on Tuesday asked senior counsel K. Parasaran, and T.R. Andhyarujina to assist it in determining the issue. Andhyarujina would be assisted by counsel Jesal Wahi.

Andhyarujina said that there has to be a debate "with regard to the conceptual meaning of the term 'defamation' used in article 19(2) of the constitution and the definition of 'defamation' in Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code."

Parasaran, on the other hand, said that the sections 499 and 500 being the existing law, are saved by the first part of the article 19(2) that says "nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law".

He contended that the freedom of speech and expression possibly has to be controlled one not to include the concept of defamation as defined under section 499.

Deciding to examine the issue, the court gave four weeks time to the respondents including the Tamil Nadu government to file their response and gave another four weeks to petitioners to file their rejoinders.

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 08 2015 | 12:08 AM IST

Next Story