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 Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Supreme Court Quashes Defamation Proceedings Against 'Sunday Blast' Owner, Upholds Freedom of Speech

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court yesterday quashed the defamation proceedings against Sanjay Upadhya, the owner of the newspaper 'Sunday Blast'. The apex court upheld the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression while setting aside the orders of the High Court and the Sessions Court.

The bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta emphasized the importance of the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution in their decision. “We are also of the view that the news article in question was published in good faith and in exercise of the Fundamental Right of Freedom of Speech and Expression enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India,” the bench observed.

The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Anand Dubey, alleging that the publication of a particular article in 'Sunday Blast' had tarnished his reputation, thereby constituting criminal defamation under Section 500 of the IPC. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hoshangabad, initially rejected the complaint, but this was later overturned by the Additional Sessions Judge and upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, leading to the present appeal.

In their judgment, the Supreme Court noted that the order passed by the learned Magistrate First Class, Hoshangabad, was well-reasoned and did not warrant interference by the higher courts. The Court observed, "The learned Magistrate in its order referred to the Fundamental Right of Freedom of Speech and Expression enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and held that the publication in question did not warrant prosecution of the accused appellant for the offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860."

The Court’s decision to quash the proceedings marks a reaffirmation of the right to freedom of speech and expression in the context of journalistic pursuits. The appeal was thus allowed, and all proceedings initiated against Sanjay Upadhya under Section 500 of the IPC were quashed.

Date of Decision: 29th January 2024

SANJAY UPADHYA VS  ANAND DUBEY

 

Latest Legal News