In Brief
This landmark judgment upholds the constitutional validity of criminal defamation laws in India (Sections 499–500 IPC, Section 199 CrPC). The Court rejected arguments that these provisions violate the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). The bench held that 'defamation' in Article 19(2) encompasses criminal defamation and is a reasonable restriction justified by the need to protect reputation—a fundamental right under Article 21. The Court emphasized that no absolute right exists; rights must be balanced. Reputation serves collective social interest, not merely individual interest. The Explanations and Exceptions to Section 499 are neither vague nor arbitrary. Constitutional fraternity and fundamental duties require respect for others' dignity. The Court granted petitioners eight weeks to challenge summons before the High Court.",
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.