question_answer

Direction: This section consists of fifty (50) questions. Each question consists of legal propositions/principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. \n other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further, You must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. \t is not the object of this section to test your knowledge of law.

Principle: In a civil action for defamation, truth of the defamatory matter is an absolute defence. However, the burden of proving truth is on the defendant; and he is liable if he does not successfully discharge this burden.

Facts: 'D', who was the editor of a local weekly, published a series of articles mentioning that 'P', who was a government servant, issued false certificates, accepted bribe, adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money and was a 'mischief monger'. 'P' brought a civil action against 'D'. Who could not prove the facts published by him?

Under the circumstances, which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

A) 'D' would be liable, since he could not prove the facts published by him

B) 'D' would not be liable, as such an action could curtail the right of expression and speech of press

C) 'D' would not be liable, as media could publish anything

D) None of the above