DEFAMATION UNDER CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAW

Written by: Khushi Mahesh Dewani

• College: SNDT Women’s University, Mumbai

• Course: B.B.A., LL.B (3rd Year)(5th Semester)

ABSTRACT

A person cannot be purposefully misrepresented, and doing so is illegal and punishable by jail time. The defamation law, which is also constitutional, appropriately restricts the right to free speech and expression. Even yet, it is not defamation if the activities committed fit under the list of exclusions. There have been many defamation cases during the seventy-one years of independence, and the court has carefully examined each one of them. These cases serve as precedents today.

DEFAMATION: WHAT IS IT?

A person’s reputation being harmed is defamation. Anyone who interferes with another person’s reputation does so at their own risk, just like when they meddle with their possessions. Libel is used to characterize defamation that occurs in writing or print (of a persistent sort), whereasslander is used to indicate defamation that occurs orally, physically, or in another transient form. In India, defamation is both a civil and criminal offence. The Law of Torts under Civil Law, which penalises offenders by awarding damages to the claimant (person filing the claim), governs defamation in the main. Defamation is a compoundable, non-cognizable, and bailableoffence under criminal law. Since a FIR cannot be filed, the police are unable to launch a libel investigation without a magistrate’s warrant. The accused may choose to request bail. The charges may be eventually dropped if the victim and the offender come to an amicable resolution (even without the court’s blessing). Defamation is defined as a crime in Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.

LIBEL AND SLANDER: THE DIFFERENCE.

English law- Defamation is split into two categories in English law, mostly for historical reasons: –

• Libel- Libel is the act of making false statements in writing, print, a photograph, or any permanent medium.

• Slander – Slander is the temporary publishing of a statement. Examples of it include spoken language and hand gestures.

The difference between libel and slander is significant in English law for two reasons:

1. Only libel has been acknowledged as a crime by criminal law. Slandering is not a crime.

2. Slander can only be sued under tort law if there is evidence of exceptional harm. Libel can never be ignored.

Indian Law: Libel and slander are handled differently under English criminal law, as was previously stated. Libel is a crime there but slander is not. Slander is only a civil offence in

England. There is no such distinction between libel and slander under Indian criminal law. Slander and libel are recognised as offences under Section 499 of the I.P.C. Libel and slander is both considered civil wrongs under English law, although there is a distinction between the two. With rare exclusions, libel is punishable in and of itself, whereas slander calls for the proof of a specific damage.

INDIA’S DEFAMATION LAW:

Criminal and civil laws both forbid defamation. Under the Civil Law’s Law of Torts, defamation is prohibited, and the victim may be entitled to damages as restitution. Defamation is a compoundable, non-cognizable, and bailable offence under criminal law. A police officer mayemploy arrest warrants only authorised by a magistrate. “The offence carries a simple sentence of up to two years in jail, a fine, or both” according to the Indian Penal Code.

DEFAMATION UNDER CIVIL LAW

The publishing of a remark intended to damage a person’s reputation among right-thinking members of society is known as defamation under civil law. Certain requirements must be completed for anything to be considered defamation under civil law:

1. The assertion must be untrue. False statements are those that aim to undermine the plaintiff’s reputation. A statement is deemed defamatory if it might subject the addressee to shame, humiliation, mockery, or contempt.

2. The aforementioned statement must be brought up with the plaintiff. It doesn’t matter that the defendant had no desire to disparage the plaintiff in any way. The defendant is responsible if the reader may infer, with reasonable grounds, that the communication wasmeant for the plaintiff.

3. The declaration has to be made public. By “publishing,” means letting the erroneous information reach someone other than the victim of the smear. Unless this is done, there is no legal basis for a civil defamation suit.

DEFENCES

The following are defences to a defamation claim:

1. JUSTIFICATION OR TRUTH – The truth of the purportedly defamatory statement is the sole complete defence in a civil defamation lawsuit. “Proving the statement’s veracity is not a defence” in a criminal prosecution. Under criminal law, for the exemption the imputation must be proven to have been made for the public good in addition to being true to be eligible.

2. FAIR COMMENT – Making a fair comment on matters of public interest is a defence to a defamation lawsuit. The following prerequisites must be met for this defence to be effective:

• A comment is required.

• The comment should be fair.

• The discourse should centre on a common interest.

The victim of libel may sue the perpetrator in either the high court or the trial court to recover monetary damages. The Law of Torts, rare and complicated type of relief observed in India, applies to the desired remedy.

According to the legislation, defamatory content is anything “calculated to harm another’s reputation by subjecting him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule.” For the legal remedy to be effective, this first need must be met.

Second, the claimant’s name must appear in the libelous statement. It must speak to a particular person; generalisation is inappropriate.

The slanderous remark must also be made public, whether orally or in writing. If these conditions are satisfied, a civil defamation act will be put into effect. After that, the defendant must make his case.

DEFAMATION UNDER CRIMINAL LAW

Section 499 of the IPC

This Section states that “Except in the cases herein excepted, whoever makes or publishes any imputation concerning any other person to injure, or know or have reason to believe that such imputation will injure, the reputation of such person is said, under the law, to defame thatperson.”

Another clause of Section 499 deals with defamation of a deceased person. The legislation states that “an imputation would amount to defamation of a deceased person” if it “would damage the person’s reputation if she were still alive and is made with the intent to inflict grievance upon his family or relatives.”

The guy claimed that the movie’s depiction of his adopted mother as a mafia queen, a brothel owner, and a prostitute had damaged his mother’s reputation. The writers of the novel “Mafia Queens of Mumbai,” which served as the basis for the film, were the respondents in this case.

The Supreme Court ruled that a party seeking interim relief must show the court that

(i) They were a close cousin or family member of the one being defamed;

(ii) The claims made regarding the departed relative or relatives were untrue; and

(iii) The deceased’s reputation and character will suffer because of the comments.

If the individual who is being accused of being slandered has not had their reputation or value diminished in the eyes of others, it is not defamation. The petitioner attempted, but failed, to demonstrate his relationship to Gangubai through family or close friends. The Supreme Court

also determined that the movie is, at least superficially, a legitimate form of artistic expression.

It is essential to comprehend the following elements of a defamation offence to recognisestatements and information that might be construed negatively.

The Essentials of Defamation

1. Imputation method – An imputation must be made or transmitted to someone other than the subject of the publication for Section 499 to deem it to be published. The imputation might be described or shown by

i. spoken or written words,

ii. creating signals,

iii. visible representations, or both.

2. The imputation must be about a specific person or people – The imputation must be to a specific individual or individuals whose identity can be confirmed. A firm, a group of people, or an entire company would be included in the imputation, which would constitute defamation. Instead of being a vague organisation (like Marxists or Leftists), a group that is the target of a defamation case must be properly designated.

3. The imputation must have been made with the intent to harm, knowing that it would harm, or having reason to think that it would harm the reputation of the subject of the imputation.

Exceptions of Defamation

Section 499 lists 10 defamation exceptions, the first of which is “the defence of truth.” Additionally, the phrase “public good” as it is employed in this exception relates to actual events rather than conjecture. The further exclusions are as follows:

1. Public behaviour of a public employee;

2. Any person whose actions cause a public controversy;

3. Publication of reports on court cases;

4. The court’s ruling on the merits of the case or the conduct of the witnesses and other parties;

5. The advantages of doing a public performance;

6. A sincere reprimand was given by a person in a position of authority;

7. A sincere charge made to a specific person; and

8. A person who made an imputation in good faithm to protect the interests of another person.

The Madras High Court stated in Tiruvengadda Mudali vs. Tripurasundari Ammal that one may go to English common law to establish additional grounds of exception to those outlined in the legislation and that the exceptions to Section 499 must be interpreted as exhaustive about thecircumstances they purport to cover.

Punishment for defamation

Someone who prints or engraves something while knowing or having reason to believe that it is defamatory of someone is subject to simple imprisonment for a term that may not exceed two years, a fine, or both, according to Section 501 of the IPC.

Publishers’ and Others’ Liability

Publishers, filmmakers, and anybody else who publishes material in India must be aware of the aforementioned criminal defamation legislation if they wish to avoid being held liable under it. Due to their defamatory content, several publications, films, and television shows have beenbanned in India, including the 2017 book “Godman to Tycoon: The Untold Story of Baba Ramdev” and a 2020 episode of the Netflix series “Bad Boy Billionaires” based on RamalingaRaju. Criminal defamation has the potential to have severe financial ramifications for those found guilty. The editors and proprietors of the news website “The Wire” are facing defamation action from Bharat Biotech for the publication of articles that were critical of the company and its COVID-19 vaccine, “COVAXIN.” The website is charged with releasing this information without performing enough fact-checking. A Telangana court ordered the removal of 14 things from the website. In light of the aforementioned, it is recommended that parties exercise prudence and perform a legal analysis of their content to identify any instances of libel and correct them before posting.

INDIAN LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS:

Numerous defamation lawsuits have been heard in Indian courts. The following are some famous cases that include fascinating details or significant court decisions.

1. D.P. Choudhary And Ors. vs Kumari Manjulata: The complainant, a 17-year-old collegestudent, allegedly departed the residence with a man after departing on the pretence that she had lectures, according to a story in the local newspaper Dainik Navjyothi. This false news item had implications for her and wrecked her prospects of finding love. She was awarded general damages in the sum of Rs. 100000 since it was actionable in and of itself.

2. Mahender Ram vs Harnandan Prasad: The complainant, a 17-year-old college student, allegedly departed the residence with a man after departing on the pretence that she had lectures, according to a story in the local newspaper Dainik Navjyothi. This false news item had implications for her and wrecked her prospects of finding love. Since it was actionable in and of itself, general damages in the amount of Rs. 100000 were granted to her.

3. Ram Jethmalani vs Subramaniam Swamy: Dr Swamy was found guilty of defaming Ram Jetmalani after the court concluded that his accusation that he had taken money from an unlawful organisation to shield the then-chief minister of Tamil Nadu from the Rajiv Gandhi assassination investigation was true.

4. Mr Arun Jaitley vs. Mr Arvind Kejriwal & Ors: The court ruled that Arvind Kejriwaland his five other leaders made derogatory comments. The matter was settled after all those implicated expressed sorrow for their actions.

5. Ramdhara And Anr. vs Mst. Phulwatibai: The plaintiff, a 45-year-old widow, wascharged with looking after the maternal uncle of the plaintiff’s daughter-in-law. The comment indicated a criticism of the woman’s virginity, the court said, making it defamatory in addition to being obscene abuse.

6. Chintaman Rao v. Madhya Pradesh State: In connection with Article 19 (2), theSupreme Court defined what “reasonable restrictions” meant. It implies careful attention and care for the benefit of the public.

7. A.M.A. Mohideen vs. T.V. Ramasubha Iyer: The statement that the defendants issuedwas done without any malicious intent. It dealt with a particular man who was detained for smuggling after travelling from Agarbathis to Ceylon for business. The plaintiff had a similar business as well, thus the court awarded him damages for the loss to his image.

8. Shreya Singhal vs. U.O.I: Online libel decision-making is important. Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000, which levies fines for sending inflammatory statements using communication services, was ruled to be unconstitutional.

CONCLUSION:

Possessing a positive reputation has advantages for everyone. If such an asset is harmed, it may be legitimately repaired. To prevent people from abusing their freedom of speech and expression for bad intentions, laws against defamation have been placed in place. Thankfully,

Indian law treats libel and slander equally. Otherwise, there may have been chances to violate the prohibition on anything being published in writing and engage in defamation.

A person cannot be intentionally misrepresented, and doing so is a crime that carries a jail sentence. The defamation law, which is also constitutional, appropriately restricts the right to free speech and expression. Even yet, it is not defamation if the activities committed fit under the listof exclusions. There have been many defamation lawsuits during the seventy-one years of independence, and the court has carefully examined each one of them. These incidents are still used as examples today.

SYNOPSIS

The act of damaging someone’s reputation by making false remarks is known as defamation. In India, it is a civil and criminal offence, and those who commit defamation face repercussions. Libel (defamation in writing) and slander (defamation in voice) are two different legal offences.

However, there are exceptions for truthful disclosures, claims made in the public interest, and comments made in good faith. Despite legal challenges, the Supreme Court maintained the Indian Defamation Statute to safeguard peoples’ reputations. In good faith, in the public interest, and for valid claims, the law makes exceptions. Despite legal challenges that claimed the law violated the right to free speech and expression, the Supreme Court maintained the statute.

Leave a Comment Cancel