BHAGWAN DAS Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by one Bhagwan Das the editor of a paper known as the Awas in Meerut. The case was tried by a Jury. The charge against him was one of libel under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and the allegation was that he had published in his newspaper continuously a series of defamatory statements and personal criticisms upon Mr. Grant, Collector of Saharanpur. Mr. Nehal Chand, a Barrister of great experience in this Court, has represented the appellant here, and he has been unable to find fault with the heads of the charge, and in the ordinary way that would dispose of this case, but it happens to be that the Collector of Saharanpur is a European and the appellant an Indian, and, therefore, the new provision in the current Criminal P.C. compels this Court to entertain an appeal upon the facts as well as upon law.

(2.) From first to last throughout the proceedings there is not to be found a trace even of an attempt by the appellant to justify the statements which he made about the Collector upon which the criticizms were based. As a matter of fact the conduct of newspaper engaged in criticizing public affairs demands from the editor a high decree of intelligence, a high degree of education and a high degree of tact and taste. The appellant appears to be lacking in all these qualifications. He, on the question of fact, suggested through his counsel that the relevant exception to the definition of "defamation" in the Code was the section which runs as follows: It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, or respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct and no further.

(3.) The two relevant features of that definition which apply to this appellant in his attack upon Mr. Grant are the words "good faith" and "conduct". The appellant has yet to learn, it seems, that the protection there given to fair comment upon the conduct and character of public servants, is the protection given by the law in the public interest to the free expression of opinion, so that a man may without fear of the consequences express an honest opinion on facts. But the words "conduct of a public servant" mean what he has done, not what he has not done, and it is no comment upon the conduct of a public servant to make defamatory and injurious charges based upon imaginary statements of fact.