Question

PRINCIPLE Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read or by signs or by visible representations makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is to defame that person.

FACTS In a community, there is a custom of stealing shoes of the bridegroom during the marriage ceremony. The shoes of the bridegroom were stolen by 'Y'. 'A' announced that 'Z' has stolen the shoes. Everyone present in the marriage party started staring at 'Z' with great surprise. 'Z' felt very ashamed.

विकल्प

• A defamed Z

• A did not defame Z

• A defamed Z for Z felt very ashamed

• A defamed the whole marriage party

Answer 1

A defamed Z for Z felt very ashamed

Explanation:

In the case presented before us A knowingly without a reason to defame him announces the name of 'Z' as the thief of his stolin show inspite of the facts that he knew.  "A defamed Z" "Z" was innocent.  "A did not defame Z" It was just a custom to steal the shoes of the groom and shoes were not taken away with the intention of theft.  Hence option is correct under sec 499 of IPC.