Search results
Nov 20, 2021 · Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India case. In 2014, corruption charges were made by Dr. Subramanian Swamy against Ms. Jayalathitha. Defamatory cases were filed by the State Government of Tamil Nadu against Dr. Subramanian Swamy in response to these allegations.
Judged on the anvil of the aforesaid constitutional norms, the provisions pertaining to criminal defamation withstand scrutiny. The principal objective of the law of defamation, civil or criminal, is to protect the reputation and dignity of the individual against scurrilous and vicious attacks.
May 13, 2016 · The Supreme Court of India dismissed challenges to the constitutionality of the criminal offense of defamation, holding that it was a reasonable restriction on the right to freedom of expression. The case had been brought by several petitioners charged with criminal defamation.
Jun 10, 2022 · Defamation as a Criminal Offence. Subramanian Swamy v Union of India. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the criminal offence of defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
Decision in Sullivan's case (Supra) as followed by the Supreme Court of India in R. Rajagopal's case (Supra) highlighted that Government nor Government Officials, if criticised in discharge of their duties, could bring no action for injunction and could not chill a public debate. Subject to establishing actual malice, action could be brought by ...
Jul 14, 2015 · They range from the 125 defamation cases filed against The Hindu by the Tamil Nadu government to its use by encounter cops against investigative journalists. Having now existed upon the statute...
People also ask
Why was Subramanian Swamy v Union of India dismissed?
Why did Subramanian Swamy file a defamation case in Tamil Nadu?
Who contested the constitutionality of criminal defamation?
Did Subramanian Swamy make corruption allegations against jayalathitha?
May 18, 2016 · The Supreme Court’s judgment in Subramanian Swamy vs Union of India, upholding the constitutionality of criminal defamation will be remembered more for its obscurely colourful language than for its progressive values.
