Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court upholds constitutionality of Travancore-Cochin Act, 1950, restricting freedom of speech.</h1> <h3>K.A. Mohamad Khan and Ors. Versus State of Kerala</h3> The court upheld the constitutionality of Section 31(5) of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act, 1950, ruling that it does not unreasonably ... - Issues Involved:1. Constitutionality of Section 31(5) of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act, 1950.2. Whether the publication by the accused amounted to a 'prejudicial report' under the Act.3. Whether the restrictions imposed by Section 31(5) are reasonable under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Constitutionality of Section 31(5) of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act, 1950:The petitioners contended that Section 31(5) of the Act is ultra vires as it imposes arbitrary and unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental rights conferred by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. They argued that the section is void under Article 13(1) of the Constitution. The Advocate-General, representing the State, countered that the legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on these rights in the interests of public order, as permitted by Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The court examined Article 19(2), which allows the state to make laws imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right to freedom of speech and expression in the interests of public order, among other considerations. The court referred to previous Supreme Court decisions, such as Ramji Lal Modi v. State of U.P. and Virendra v. State of Punjab, which elucidated that laws enacted 'in the interests of public order' could impose restrictions on fundamental rights.2. Whether the publication by the accused amounted to a 'prejudicial report' under the Act:The court found that the report published by the accused in the Malayalam daily 'Janatha' was false and baseless. The report alleged police torture leading to a suicide, which was proven to be untrue. The publication of this report was considered a 'prejudicial act' and 'prejudicial report' as defined under Section 2 of the Act, thus constituting an offense punishable under Section 31(5). The court noted that both the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Sessions Judge had concluded that the report was false. The defense's argument that the report was published in good faith believing it to be true was not accepted by the court.3. Whether the restrictions imposed by Section 31(5) are reasonable under Article 19(2) of the Constitution:The court considered whether the restrictions imposed by Section 31(5) were reasonable and in the interests of public order. The petitioners argued that the section could potentially apply to both true and false reports, thereby imposing a total prohibition on the exercise of fundamental rights. However, the court clarified that the section was intended to penalize only the publication of false reports and rumors. The court referred to the principle of severability, indicating that even if a law is partially unconstitutional, the valid portion can still be upheld. The court cited the Supreme Court's decision in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, which upheld the constitutionality of sections that aim to prevent activities likely to create public disorder or incite violence. The court concluded that the restrictions imposed by Section 31(5) were reasonable and within the permissible limits of legislative action under Article 19(2).Conclusion:The court held that Section 31(5) of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act, 1950, does not impose unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. The section was found to be constitutionally valid as it imposes restrictions in the interests of public order. The publication by the accused was determined to be a false report, amounting to an offense under Section 31(5). Consequently, the conviction and sentence were confirmed, and the revision petition was dismissed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found