AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1 paragraphs · 118 words
1.
The point of the defamation complained of lies in the imputation that Dr. Nair was in different, not to the opinion of his opponents, but to the sufferings of the inhabitants of Tondiarpet. The question is whether the article complained conveys this imputation. The wording is somewhat ambiguous, but on the whole we do not think the more sinister interpretation should be put upon it. We do not think its desirable that private conversation of this kind should be reported in an account of the proceedings of public bodies, but we are not satisfied that the criminal offence of defamation has been committed and we set aside the conviction and sentence. The fine, if-paid, will be refunded.