CURRENT AFFAIRS

2016

Question [CLICK ON ANY CHOICE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER]
The Supreme Court has upheld constitutional validity of penal laws on defamation as the right to life under which Indian Constitutional article
A
Article 19
B
Article 20
C
Article 21
D
Article 22
Explanation: 

Detailed explanation-1: -It held that criminal defamation is not a disproportionate restriction on free speech, because protection of reputation is a fundamental right as well as a human right. The Court relied on the judgments of other countries and reaffirmed the right to reputation as a part of the right to life under Article 21.

Detailed explanation-2: -500. Punishment for defamation.-Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Detailed explanation-3: -Punishment for defamation under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Anyone who defames another person is subject to punishment under Section 500 of the IPC, which includes fine, simple imprisonment for a time that may not exceed two years or both.

Detailed explanation-4: -In the recent judgment of Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, the apex court held that the reputation of an individual is a basic element under Article 21 of the Constitution and balancing of fundamental rights is a constitutional necessity. Right to free speech does not give a right to an individual to defame others.

Detailed explanation-5: -Under the Criminal law, Defamation is a bailable, non-cognizable offence and compoundable offence. Hence a policeman may arrest only with an arrest warrant issued by a magistrate. The Indian Penal Code punishes the offence with a simple imprisonment up to two years, or with fine, or both.

There is 1 question to complete.