Start learning 50% faster. Sign in now
In 2014, corruption charges were made by Dr. Subramanian Swamy against Ms. Jayalathitha. Defamatory cases were filed by the State Government of Tamil Nadu against Dr. Subramanian Swamy in response to these allegations. Later, the constitutional validity of the offense of criminal defamation was challenged by Dr. Subramanian Swamy along with some other prominent politicians. This is one of the landmark cases as far as criminal defamation is concerned. This was also the first case in which the Supreme Court conducted a hearing on a frontal challenge to the constitutionality of one of the oldest and most strict laws that restrict speech, that is, criminal defamation. The challenges to the constitutionality of the offense of criminal defamation were dismissed by the Apex Court and the Court said that the restrictions that were imposed on the Right to Freedom of Expression by the criminalization of the offense of defamation were reasonable and just in nature. The Court also said that there exists a constitutional duty to respect the dignity of other people. Therefore, the constitutionality of the criminal offense of defamation under Section 499 and Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Statements: R ≥ S = T; R < U < V; W > X > V
Conclusion:
I. U > T
II. T < V
Statements: K @ L; M & O, N % L, K $ O
Conclusions:
I. O @ L
II. M @ L
<...Statements: Q % R & L @ T $ D; W % Q # P
Conclusions : I. D % R II. Q % L I...
Statements: C = A ≤ H < K ≥ L = Q; S = T ≥ K
Conclusion: I. C < T II. A = S
...Statements: A $ B @ D & E @ G % H, F & A, G $ J
Conclusions: I. A # H II. D $ J
...In the question, assuming the given statements to be true, find which of the conclusion (s) among given two conclusions is /are definitely true and the...
Statements: T < U = V = W < X < Y; Z = Y < R < S < O
Conclusions:
I. Z > U
II. T < O
Statement: A≤B ≤C>D ; E<D ;F>E
Conclusions:
I. D>A
II. E<C
Statements: Q > P > R ≥ N; L ≥ Q; O = M < N
Conclusions:
I. P > L
II. O < R
III. L > O
Statements: C > G > E; E = F; G < H
Conclusions: I) F < G
II) E < C
III) C > H