Defamation Judgments

Posted on January 14 by ShadesOfKnife

Here I list the landmark judgments from High Courts of India and Supreme Court of India.

1920-1925

Gopal Naidu and another Vs King-Emperor on 22 December 1922 (Bombay High Court: the purpose of the codified statute is that on any point specifically dealt with by it the law shall be ascertained by interpreting the language used; the Court is not entitled to invoke the Common Law of England in the matter of defamation)

1926-1930

Tiruvengada Mudali Vs Tripurasundari Ammal on 15 February 1926 (Madras High Court: the defamatory matter contained in the plaint are accusations in nature and they do not have absolute privilege but only qualified privilege as provided by sec 499 of IPC)

1931-1935

1936-1940

1941-1945

1946-1950

1951-1955

1956-1960

1961-1965

Thangavelu Chettiar Vs Ponnammal on 1 November, 1965 (Madras High Court: the defamatory matter contained in the plaint was admittedly signed and filed by the petitioner. There can be no doubt that there was publication of the defamatory matter)

1966-1970

M.C. Verghese Vs T.J. Ponnan and Anr on 13 November 1968 (Supreme Court of India: at common law there had never been a separate principle or rule that communications between a husband and wife during marriage were inadmissible in evidence on the ground of public policy.)

1996-2000

Dr. J.Sudarshan Vs R.Sankaran on 16 August, 1991 (Madras High Court: The Civil Court would confine its decision to the trespass, threat of injury and damage by the servants, agents and workmen of the various defendants and the entitlement of token damages by the respondent, while the criminal Court, the passage being per se defamatory, would proceed to find out whether any one of the 10 Exceptions to S. 499, I.P.C. would apply.)

2001-2005

2006-2010

Dayanand Rao Rangadal Vs Suresh and Ors on 14 August, 2008 (Karnataka High Court: “a written statement is a public document” and “a criminal proceeding can be initiated when a civil proceeding is ongoing”)

2011-2015

2016-2020

Subramanian Swamy Vs Union of India on 13 May, 2016 (Supreme Court: IPC 499 and 500 and CrPC 199 are Constitutionally valid)
M.K.Varghese Cor Episcopa Vs State of Kerala on 08 January, 2020 (Kerala High Court: Complaint of defamation cannot be quashed under section 482 CrPC, as it does not have absolute privilege and only qualified privilege)

Sameer Garg and Anr Vs State and Anr on 25 September, 2019

Posted on October 13, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Honorable Delhi High Court held that, “if any of the allegations are found to be patently false, the trial court shall take necessary steps to prosecute the concerned complainant to the full extent of law”

Sameer Garg and Anr Vs State and Anr on 25 September, 2019

Citations:

Indiankanoon.org link:

Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in

Subrat Kumar Sen Vs State of UP on 03 October, 2019

Posted on October 6, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

This is judgment from Apex Court which is hearing the contention, No Maintenance to Willfully Deserting Knife. Let’s follow the case.

Subrat Kumar Sen Vs State of UP on 03 October, 2019

Here is the Allahabad High Court order

Dr. Subrat Kumar Sen Vs State of U.P. and Anr on 18 July, 2019

Indian Marriage Registration Acts and Rules

Posted on September 22, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Here are the Marriage Registration Acts and Rules along with sample Registration forms of all States and Union Territories of India.

Supreme Court of India has, in its order dated 14th February, 2006 in Transfer Petition (C) no. 291 of 2005 has directed all states to frame rules with respect to the compulsory registration of marriages. Final Disposal Judgment is here along with all earlier orders.

Andhra Pradesh Act
1. 2018 Amendment
2. 1965 Rules
3. Registration Form
Arunachal Pradesh Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Assam Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Bihar Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Chattisgarh Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Goa Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Gujarat Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Haryana Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Himachal Pradesh Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Jammu and Kashmir Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Jharkhad Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Karnataka Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Kerala Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Madhya Pradesh Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Maharashtra Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Manipur Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Meghalaya Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Mizoram Act
1. 2011 Amendment
2. 2014 Act
3. 2015 Amendment
4. 2007 Rules
5. Registration Form
Nagaland
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Odisha Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
3. Orissa Mohammedan Marriage and Divoprces Registration (amendment) Rules, 2006
Punjab
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Rajasthan
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Sikkim
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Tamil Nadu
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Telangana Act
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Tripura
1. Rules
2. Registration Form
Uttar Pradesh
1. 1973 Rules
2. Registration Form
Uttarakhand Act
1. 2012 Rules
2. Registration Form
West Bengal
1. 2010 Rules
2. Registration Form

Dharm Raj Yadav and Ors Vs State of U.P. and Ors on 10 January, 2006

Posted on September 8, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Dharm Raj Yadav and Ors Vs State of U.P. and Ors on 10 January, 2006

The Kusum Sharma Vs Mahinder Kumar Sharma case

Posted on August 29, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Here are the key orders passed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court on the case of Kusum Sharma Vs Mahinder Kumar Sharma case.

On 14 January 2015, Hon’ble Delhi High Court has prescribed the format for the affidavit that all parties of matrimonial cases have to file, so that the disposal can happen in 60 days as mandated by the Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 here.
The appellant Kusum Sharma has expired on 26th September, 2016 here.
On 29 May, 2017, based on inputs and suggestions from some Family courts, further modifications are made to the prescribed format of the affidavit that all parties of matrimonial cases should file. On 6 December, 2017, based on inputs and suggestions from some Family courts, further modifications are made to the prescribed format of the affidavit that all parties of matrimonial cases should file. See a consolidated update here.
On 3 July 2019, expedious disposal of maintenance applications at the Family court is sough in DHC here.