SC: No one was used dishonestly, the banner reflects complaints of homebuilders. Bharat News
New Delhi: Protecting the interest of the homebukes, the Supreme Court on Thursday said that buyers staged a peaceful protest and organized a public place against a reaaltar in a public place, there would be no amount for defamation without using the derogatory language, the report of Amit Anand Chaudhary.
Given that the right to dissatisfaction in a legitimate and legitimate manner is an integral part of fundamental right Freedom of expression And the expression and that every person should respect the rights of others for disagreement, the court quashed the criminal defamation proceedings against some homebukers to protest against a builder in Mumbai.
The case was lodged by the builder, alleging that his action against him was for defamation.
“The right to protest peacefully without falling out of the dishonesty of the law is a equal right that consumers should be kept as a bus, as the seller enjoys his right to commercial speech. Any attempt to portray them as criminal offenses, when the required material is not excluded, there will be a clear misconduct of the procedure and a jasmine should be involved about the justis of the process.
The SC said that the complaint raised in the banner was in relation to civil issues, in which they were not forming society, water problems, poor lift maintenance, seepage, plumbing issues, etc. and they used the caption “We protest for our rights”.
“Initially, what attacks us that there is no dishonest or intimate language working against the defendant. There is no reference to any expression like fraud, cheating, abuse etc. in mild language, on some issues, which have been broadcast as their complaints to the appellants,” the court said.
SC said that no case was made for criminal defamation, which depends on the choice of words used and should be related to the intention of harming anyone to harm or to know or to believe that such an effect would harm such an impact of such a person.
“Language is the vehicle through which ideas are expressed. Did the appellants cross their privilege in erecting the banner? We do not think. As has previously determined, all banners have shown what they think they had complaints against the defendant. Builder-Buir-relationship,” the bench said.
