exceptions can be said to have been raised. Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code states that whoever by words 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 said, except in the cases of exceptions mentioned after that section, to defame that person. The 1st exception is imputation of truth which public good requires to be made or published, the 2nd exception is public conduct of public servants, the 3rd exception is conduct of any person touching any public question, the 4th exception is publication of reports of proceedings of Courts, the 5th exception is merits of case decided in Court or conduct of witnesses and others concerned, the 6th exception is merits of public performance, the 7th exception censure passed in good faith by person having lawful authority over another, the 8th exception is accusation preferred in good faith to authorised person, the 9th exception is imputation made in good faith by person for protection of his or other's interests and finally the 10th exception is caution intended for good of person to whom conveyed or for public good. Apart from not stating as to which of the exceptions have been invoked, the Applicant’s Advocate has also not stated as to how the allegations that have been made could be said to be falling within any exception much less third exception below Section 499. In these circumstances, to my mind, this argument being raised, for the first time, cannot be entertained.
