SC stays proceedings against Swamy

Issues notice to Centre, Tamil Nadu government and Jayalalithaa

October 31, 2014 12:41 am | Updated May 23, 2016 03:48 pm IST - New Delhi

The Supreme Court stayed on Thursday all further proceedings in the five criminal defamation complaints filed by the Tamil Nadu government against Bharatiya Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy at the instance of the former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa. The proceedings are pending before the Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai.

Granting the stay, a Bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Uday Lalit issued notice to the Centre, the State government and Ms. Jayalalithaa on Dr. Swamy’s writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code relating to criminal defamation.

Dr. Swamy argued that these provisions violated the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. He challenged the validity of Section 199(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which deals with a special remedy in regard to criminal defamation of a public servant in respect of his or her conduct in the discharge of public functions.

The Bench said several issues raised by the petition required consideration. “In the democratic body politic, public opinion and perception is the fundamental principle to guide and correct the executive action. If they are scuttled or fetters are put by launching criminal prosecution, democracy will not grow. The individual interest in the guise of reputation cannot have supremacy over the larger public interest,” it said.

The Bench pointed out that in the interests of individual freedom, the freedom of speech and expression could not be gagged. The executive could not block expression of public opinion by invoking cases of defamation through the Public Prosecutor by spending from the State exchequer. The concept of sanction for prosecution under Section 199(2) of the Cr.P.C. could not be allowed to override public interest.

It posted the matter for further hearing after six weeks.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.