Magistrate, upon due application of judicial mind, would be justified to dismiss the complaint on such ground and it would not amount to an act in excess of jurisdiction if such dismissal has the support of reasons.” III. BALANCING CRITICAL YET COMPETING INTERESTS: FREEDOM OF SPEECH & EXPRESSION Vs. PROTECTING A PERSON FROM REPUTATIONAL INJURY 43. Reputation is a form of honor and honor has many aspects. The recognition of reputation as a significant social asset is fundamental, and the Courts play an important role in ensuring equal protection to every individual, regardless of their standing in society. 44. By analysing the limited sphere of jurisprudence evolved till date regarding „retweet‟ or „repost‟ being covered under meaning of „publication‟, this Court would note that the law on defamation on the one hand protects one person’s reputation who is the complainant and one person’s fundamental right who has been alleged to be an accused to freedom of expression. Freedom of expression and the use of cyberspace and social media for the said purpose, especially by persons who hold positions of authority and have huge following on their social media accounts, needs to be kept in mind while balancing the contrasting approaches to be adopted towards both the parties, when they come to a Court to determine their rights. 45. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:05.02.2024 16:25:50 In addressing a democratic community, it is crucial to CRL.M.C. 6347/2019 Page 31 of 50