Question: A says of a book published by Z–“Z’s book is foolish. Z must be a weak man. Z’s book is indecent. Z must be a man of impure mind”. What offence is committed by A, if any? [HR. J.S. 2001] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [A says of a book published… Read More »

Question: A says of a book published by Z–“Z’s book is foolish. Z must be a weak man. Z’s book is indecent. Z must be a man of impure mind”. What offence is committed by A, if any? [HR. J.S. 2001] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [A says of a book published by Z–“Z’s book is foolish. Z must be a weak man. Z’s book is indecent. Z must be a man of impure mind”. What offence is committed by A, if any? [HR. J.S. 2001]] Answer The sixth Exception...

Question: A says of a book published by Z–“Z’s book is foolish. Z must be a weak man. Z’s book is indecent. Z must be a man of impure mind”. What offence is committed by A, if any? [HR. J.S. 2001]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [A says of a book published by Z–“Z’s book is foolish. Z must be a weak man. Z’s book is indecent. Z must be a man of impure mind”. What offence is committed by A, if any? [HR. J.S. 2001]]

Answer

The sixth Exception to section 499 is based on the merit of public performance. The exception states that it is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion respecting the merits of any performance which its author has submitted to the judgment of the public, or respecting the character of the author so far as his character appears in such performance, and no further.

Explanation.—A performance may be submitted to the judgment of the public expressly or by acts on the part of the author which imply such submission to the judgment of the public.

The object of this exception is that the public should have the benefit of free criticism of all public performances submitted to its judgment.

However, as the facts of the present case show which are borrowed from the illustration (e) appended to the Sixth Exception of defamation.

In this case, when A says—’I am not surprised that Z’s book is foolish and indecent, for he is a weak man and a libertine’. A is not within this exception, inasmuch as the opinion which he expresses of Z’s character is an opinion not founded on Z’s book.

In the case of Merivale v. Carson [[1920] QBD 275], the critic misdescribed Merivale’s play as immoral, though there was nothing immoral in it. The court held the defendant liable on the ground that he had overstepped the bounds of fair criticism.

Similarly, in a case where the defendant wrote an article in a newspaper advising an actor to return to his old profession, that of a waiter, when in fact the actor was never a waiter in his life, the defendant was held liable getting no protection of this section.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. IPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
  2. IPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
  3. IPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
  4. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
  5. IPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
  6. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
  7. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
  8. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
  9. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
  10. IPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
Updated On 2021-09-04T19:14:26+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story