KARI SINGH Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in this case has been convicted of defaming one, Mr. Macpherson. It appears that in a former case lie applied to the District Magistrate for a transfer, and in that application he stated that Mr. Macpherson had brought to Court the manager of the Majhoul Factory, who was the trying Magistrate s tenant, and had had a private talk with the trying Magistrate. He inferred that this was done to put pressure on the trying Magistrate, and to induce him to convict the petitioner.

(2.) It appears that this was all pure invention. The manager of the Majhoul Factory was not brought to Court at all, and Mr. Macpherson had no private talk with the trying Magistrate. The assertion clearly amounted to an accusation against Mr. Macpherson that he had attempted to corrupt justice, and it cannot be gainsaid that it was defamatory, and made in bad faith.

(3.) The petitioner has obtained a rule on the Magistrate to show cause why the conviction should not be set aside, on the ground that the statement in the application for transfer was absolutely privileged.