Constitutionality of Section 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code 1860

Karthik.T | Sastra Deemed University Thanjavur | 18th July 2020

Subramanian Swamy Vs Union Of India

FACTS:

This was a famous case of the supreme court. This case dealt with the constitutionality of defamation under section 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The fact of this case is Subramanian Swamy who was a public interest litigator field a case against Jayalalitha who was the chief minister of TamilNadu that time for corruption made by her. So the TamilNadu government by return filed a case against him and many politicians under section 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code. This case is all about the constitutionality of defamation and some section of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code.

ISSUES:

Whether section 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code is constitutionally valid?

LEGAL PROVISION:

1. Section 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Section 199(1) and 199(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

The petitioner contended that their right to speech is been violated. The constitution of India gives every person the right to speech and expression. They just filed a petition for corruption done by the former chief minister of Tamil Nadu. By return, they filed a petition against many politicians against section 199 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. So this is arbitrary against Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. So struck section 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code.

OBSERVATION MADE BY COURT:

The court observed that the term defamation used in Article 19(2) can not be given a restricted meaning. The doctrine of noscitur a sociis can not be applied to the expression incitement of the offense as it would unnecessarily make it a restricted one that the founding fathers of the constitution did not intend. The principal of noscotur a sociis can not be applied to give a restricted meaning to the term defamation to include criminal action if it gives rise to incitement to constitute the offense. So the reasonable restriction is there in Article 19(2) so it can not be made as unconstitutional . and it observed all the petitioners contends that it violates their right to speech but the defamation is a reasonable restriction.

JUDGMENT:

The court held that section 499 and 500 are constitutionally valid and hence defamation is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) of Indian Constitution.