Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Emperor Vs. Padman Babul Mhatre

Emperor vs Padman Babul Mhatre

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Jun 13, 1912
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/333813

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Application for Revision No. 62 of 1912
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 499-Defamation-Statements made to caste-Privileged communication-Good faith-- Statement made in protection of interest.;The accused having suspected that the complainants were given to drinking liquor made an application to the caste calling for an enquiry into the ir conduct. F...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Emperor

Respondent

Padman Babul Mhatre

Legal References

Reported In
(1912)14BOMLR585

Excerpt

penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 499-defamation-statements made to caste-privileged communication-good faith-- statement made in protection of interest.;the accused having suspected that the complainants were given to drinking liquor made an application to the caste calling for an enquiry into the ir conduct. for this they were convicted of defamation; --; (1) that the accused were not guilty of defamation, for as members of the caste they had every right to do what they had done, so long as they acted in good faith and for this protection of the interests of the caste.;(2) that the communication was privileged, inasmuch as it was not communicated to anybody beyond the caste and all that the accused did was to complain to the caste which hail jurisdiction to enquire into the complaint. - - as members of the caste they had every right to do it, so long as they acted in good faith, with due care and attention, and for the protection of the interests of the caste. 5. in this case it is not pretended that the libel was communicated to anybody beyond the caste but all that the accused did was to complain to the caste which had jurisdiction to enquire into the complaint.1. the convictions and sentences in this application must be set aside.2. the facts found by the trial magistrate are : the accused having suspected that the complainants were given to drinking liquor made an application to the caste calling for an enquiry into their conduct. as members of the caste they had every right to do it, so long as they acted in good faith, with due care and attention, and for the protection of the interests of the caste.3. the learned magistrate has found that the conduct of the complainants warranted the suspicion entertained by the accused but he thinks that because the allegations in their application to the caste were libellous, therefore, it was not a privileged communication.4. but a privileged communication means a communication which is made by a member of a caste to the other members inviting an inquiry into the conduct of persons against whom the allegations are directed.5. in this case it is not pretended that the libel was communicated to anybody beyond the caste but all that the accused did was to complain to the caste which had jurisdiction to enquire into the complaint.6. on the ground that the alleged libel was a privileged communication and was protected by the exception to section 499 of the indian penal code the rule must be made absolute and the convictions and sentences set inside and the lines, if paid, should be refunded.

Full Judgment

1. The convictions and sentences in this application must be set aside.

2. The facts found by the trial Magistrate are : The accused having suspected that the complainants were given to drinking liquor made an application to the caste calling for an enquiry into their conduct. As members of the caste they had every right to do it, so long as they acted in good faith, with due care and attention, and for the protection of the interests of the caste.

3. The learned Magistrate has found that the conduct of the complainants warranted the suspicion entertained by the accused but he thinks that because the allegations in their application to the caste were libellous, therefore, it was not a privileged communication.

4. But a privileged communication means a communication which is made by a member of a caste to the other members inviting an inquiry into the conduct of persons against whom the allegations are directed.

5. In this case it is not pretended that the libel was communicated to anybody beyond the caste but all that the accused did was to complain to the caste which had jurisdiction to enquire into the complaint.

6. On the ground that the alleged libel was a privileged communication and was protected by the exception to Section 499 of the Indian penal Code the rule must be made absolute and the convictions and sentences set inside and the lines, if paid, should be refunded.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial