Ravi was having a printing press and was taking orders to print books or pamphlets or likewise. In an order for printing, he published a defamatory material in Kannada language. He was unaware of the matter in it, as the

Section 499 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) provides that whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, 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 hereinafter excepted, to defame that person. Section 501 of IPC provides that whoever prints or engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. A person printing or engraving defamatory matter abets the offence of defamation and is guilty under section 501. However, printing or engraving of defamatory material is not sufficient and the court is required to be satisfied that the accused knew or had good reasons to believe that such a matter was defamatory before holding a person guilty under section 501. In the case of Sankaran v. Ramkrishna Pillai, AIR 1960 Ker 141 , the defamatory matter was printed in Malayalam and the accused did not know the language, his mens rea was absent and he was held as not guilty. In view of the above said provisions, it can be said that Ravi is not guilty of defamation under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Alternate Answer (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) Section 356 (1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (BNS) provides that whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, 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 hereinafter excepted, to defame that person. Section 356(3) of BNS provides that whoever prints or engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. A person printing or engraving defamatory matter abets the offence of defamation and is guilty under section 356(3). However, printing or engraving of defamatory material is not sufficient and the court is required to be satisfied that the accused knew or had good reasons to believe that such a matter was defamatory before holding a person guilty under section 356 (3). In the case of Sankaran v. Ramkrishna Pillai, AIR 1960 Ker 141 , the defamatory matter was printed in Malayalam and the accused did not know the language, his mens rea was absent and he was held as not guilty. In view of the above said provisions, it can be said that Ravi is not guilty of defamation under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.