DR. S. RAMADOSS Vs. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ARIYALUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T. Shumugarajeswaran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent.

(2.) 1. The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Sessions Court, Ariyalur. The learned Public Prosecutor, Ariyalur District has filed the said complaint against the petitioner herein for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of I.P.C. 2. 2. In the complaint in C.C.No.1 of 2013, it is alleged that the petitioner/accused is the founder of the Pattali Makkal Katchi and that on 07.02.2013 in a Public Meeting held at about 06:00 p.m at Kamarajar Thidal, Ariyalur, petitioner/accused spoke against the late Honourable Chief Minister intending to harm her reputation in respect of her conduct in the discharge of the public office.

(3.) According to the respondent/complainant, the speech made by the petitioner/accused is per se defamatory in nature. A perusal of the speech made by the petitioner herein shows that there is no ingredient to attract the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of I.P.C. The petitioner/accused is the founder of the Pattali Makkal Katchi and there will be accusations against the Government and if such statements are made to be prosecuted for defamation, the freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India would be curtailed. Of course, no right including the right guanranted under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India is absolute. However, the words uttered by the petitioner/accused cannot be said to constitute an offence of defamation and it is relevant to extract the 3rd Exception of Section 499 IPC which reads as follows: