MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

No Specifics on Publication Location and Its Impact” – Delhi High Court Dismisses Defamation Case on Territorial Jurisdiction Grounds

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a judgment delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla, has dismissed a defamation case, emphasizing the lack of specific details regarding the location of publication and its impact, leading to issues of territorial jurisdiction.

Legal Point of the Judgment: The judgment revolves around the importance of specific details concerning the location of publication in defamation cases, especially in the context of social media, to establish territorial jurisdiction.

Facts and Issues: Dr. Kiran Pal Singh approached the High Court challenging the dismissal of his criminal revision petition by the Principal District and Sessions Judge. The original complaint, alleging defamation by Purnima Singh through Facebook posts, was dismissed by the trial court for want of territorial jurisdiction, citing the absence of specifics on the place of publication and the consequent impact.

Court Assessment: Justice Navin Chawla observed, “They do not mention where the publication has taken place.” The Court underscored the necessity of specific details regarding the publication location and its impact for establishing territorial jurisdiction in defamation cases, particularly involving social media.

Decision: The High Court upheld the lower courts’ dismissals, reiterating the need for specific territorial details in such complaints. However, the dismissal does not affect the merits of the defamation claim, allowing the petitioner the option to file a new complaint in the appropriate jurisdiction.

Date of Decision: March 1, 2024

DR KIRAN PAL SINGH VERSUS PURNIMA SINGH

Latest Legal News