RAM LAL Vs. STATE AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1965-3-44
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on March 02,1965

RAM LAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is a revision by Ram Lal complainant, who had filed a complaint Under Section 500 I.P.C. against his daughter-in-law Smt. Munni Devi and others for having made a very defamatory statement about him during the course of her deposition recorded in proceedings under Section 107/117 Code of Criminal Procedure which had been initiated at the instance of Smt. Munni Devi aforesaid and others against the complain-ant and his son etc. There was a cross case also at the instance of the complainant against Smt. Munni Devi and others.
(2.)In the case in which the complainant-applicant was the opposite arty, Smt. Munni Devi was examined as a prosecution witness, when she made allegations of attempted rape on her by the complainant. According to the girl, that was the foundation of the whole trouble and it was on that account that she had come away to her parent's house. But the applicant and his son (the latter being the husband of Smt. Munni Devi) wanted to call her back to their house, but her parents aid not agree thereto. Therefore, on a certain date, as soon as the girl emerged out of the laterine, she was caught hold of by the applicant and others and it was with great difficulty that she was rescued by the witnesses, after she had already received some injuries at the hands of the applicant and his party-men.
(3.)The two courts below have rightly found that the defamatory statement in question was covered by VIII exception to Section 490 I.P.C. as having been made before the Magistrate who exercised lawful authority with respect to the subject matter of the accusation. Such a statement made during the course of judicial proceed-ing's, which was also essential for the decision of the dispute, would certainly fall within the VIII exception to Section 499 I.P.C. Normally a woman belonging to a high caste and respectable family would be very loath indeed to make a statement derogatory to her murals, unless and until it was true & had been made in good faith for the purpose of seeking redress from a lawful authority. As such, apart from having been made before a court of law in a judicial proceeding, the statement appears to have been made in good faith and of necessity. The courts below were, therefore, fully justified in dismissing the complaint and discharging the accused.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.