TASK 1 - What if someone states a false statement about you ?

Author - Parul Tikia

Student
Maharaja Agrasen Institute Of Management Studies, New Delhi
Contact - 7011010167
Email - parultikia@gmail.com
Linkedin - https://www.linkedin.com/in/parul-tikia-047933211

Abstract

A person’s reputation is his property and in some cases more valuable than his property.
Defamation is the legal term used for describing when someone spreads falsehoods about a
person verbally or in writing which damages the reputation of the person. It is defined under
Section 499 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 500 provides that a person
committing an offence under this section is liable with simple imprisonment for a term of 2
years or fine or with both. This article seeks to provide a thorough understanding of types of
defamation under both English law and Indian law. It also provides understanding about
essentials that constitute defamation through the help of several case laws. The purpose of
this article is to determine the defences which can be used against defamation. The article
goes on to analyse the defences.

Keywords - Defamation, Indian Penal Code, Libel, Slander, Innuendo, Defences, Fair
Comment, Privilege

Introduction

It is an insult to the reputation of a person which he has a legal right to maintain. Lies about a
person can cause real damage to the person.

Mainly because of historic reasons, English law divides defamation into - Libel and Slander.
Slander is publication of a defamatory statement in a transient form or in simple words it is
something that can be heard. Examples of it can be spoken words or gestures. While, Libel is
publication made in permanent form or in simple words something that can be seen through
eyes. Examples of it are printing, pictures etc.

In English law, only libel has been recognised as an offence whereas slander is no offence
under criminal law. But, under law or torts, slander is actionable and it requires special proof
of damage whereas libel is actionable per se which means it does not need any proof.
In Indian law, defamation is not sub- divided into libel and slander. It can be both crime or
tort. Both libel and slander are criminal offences under Section 499 of Indian Penal
Code,1860.

In D.P. Choudhary & Ors. v. Kumari Manjulata (1997) [1], a lady aged 17 years belonging
to a well educated and reputed family was defamed by an editorial which stated that she ran
away with a boy on the pretext of taking classes. Case was filed against D.P. Choudhary who
was the managing director of the newspaper. The refusal or marriage proposal of the lady and
her friends making fun of her was taken as proof. The Hon’ble court held that this was a case
of defamation as reputation has been damaged by something which was read by many people.
Compensation of Rs 10000 was given in this case.

Essentials Of Defamation

1. The statement must be defamatory

Defamatory statement is the one which tends to injure the reputation of a person in the eyes
of the members of the society.

In Ram Jethmalani v. Subramaniam Swamy [2], the trial of assasination of Late P.M. Rajiv
Gandhi was in progress and Subramaniam Swamy remarked that the then CM of Tamil Nadu
was aware of the fact that assasination will take place. Ram Jethmalani was told by
Subramaniam Swamy that he was representing the CM because he was paid by an illegal
organisation. The Hon’ble court in this case held that this was a case of defamation. Damages
of Rs. 5 lacs were awarded by the Delhi High Court.

However, mere hasty expression in anger or vulgar language to which no hearer would injure
the character of a person does not come under defamation. Intention to defame os not
necessary.

The Innuendo - A statement is prima facie defamatory when its natural and obvious that
means results in that conclusion. generally it should happen that the statement was clearly
innocent however owing to some secondary meaning, it should be thought-about to be
slanderous.

2. The statement must refer to the plaintiff

If the person to whom the statement was published could reasonably infer that that the
statement referred to the plaintiff, the defendant is nevertheless liable.

In T.V. Ramasubba Iyer And Anr. v. A.M.A. Mohindeen [3], there was a statement which
said that a particular person carrying business of agarbathies to Ceylon has been arrested for
the offence of smuggling. The plaintiff was a person who was carrying out a similar business
whose reputation was harmed by this statement. The Hon’ble court in this statement held that
the defendant was liable even though he had no intention to defame the plaintiff .

Defamation of a class of persons - Once the words see a bunch of people or a category of
persons, no member of that cluster or category will sue unless he will prove that the words
might fairly be thought of to be referring to him. Thus, “if a person wrote that everyone's
lawyers were thieves, no specific professional might sue him unless there was one thing to
prove to the actual individual.”

Defamation of the deceased - Defaming a deceased is not any civil wrong. Under legal code,
however, it's going to amount to defamation to impute something to a deceased, if the
imputation would damage the name of that person, if living, and is meant to be hurtful to the
emotions of his family or different close relatives.

3. The statement must be published

Publication means making the defamatory matter known to some other person other than the
person defamed, and unless that is done, no civil action for defamation lies. Communication
to the plaintiff himself is not enough because defamation is an injury to the reputation and
reputation consists in the estimation in which others hold him and not a man’s own opinion of
himself.

In Mahendra Ram v. Harnandan Prasad [4] , it's been control by the Madras judicature that
if an announcement relating to the validity of the wedding of someone is uncalled for
underneath the circumstances of the case and is probably going to injure the name of
someone, the person creating such statement may be restrained from doing thus.

Injunction against publication of a defamatory statement

In Prameela Ravindran v. P. Lakshmikutty Amma [5], it has been held by the Madras High
Court that if a statement regarding the validity of the marriage of a person is uncalled for
under the circumstances of the case and is likely to injure the reputation of a person, the
person making such statement can be restrained from doing so.

Communication between husband and wife

In the eyes of law, husband and wife are one person and the communication of a defamatory
matter from the husband to the wife or vice versa is no publication. But, communication of a
matter defamatory of one spouse to the other is sufficient.

In Theaker v. Richardson [6], the defendant wrote a letter to the plaintiff making false
allegations of her being prostitute and a brothel keeper. The letter was sent under the
circumstances that the plaintiff’s husband in all probability would have read the same. The
plaintiff’s husband opened and read it. The defendant was held liable.

Repetition of the defamatory matter

The liability of the person who repeats a defamatory matter arises in the same way as that of
the originator, because every repetition is a fresh publication giving rise to a fresh cause of
action. Not only the author of the defamatory matter is liable but its editor, printer, publisher
would also be liable in the same way. Their liability is strict.

In Emmens v. Pottle [7], the defendants, who were large - scale news - vendors, sold copies
of publication containing libeelous matter concerning the plaintiff. It was found that they
neither knew nor were negligent in not knowing the matter and hence there was no
publication on their part. It was held by the Hon’ble court that they were not liable.

DEFENCES

The defences to an action for defamation are:

1. Justification of truth

In a civil action for defamation, the truth of the defamatory matter is a complete defence and
the reason for this is that “ Law will not permit a man to recover damages for something
being true about him “.
Under criminal law on the other hand merely proving that the statement was true is not a
good defence and besides this, the defendant has to show that it was made for public good
also. If the defendant is not able to prove the truth of the facts, the defence cannot be availed.

In Radheshyam Tiwari v. Eknath [8], the defendant published a series of articles against the
plaintiff, that the plaintiff who is a Block Development Officer had issued false certificates,
accepted bribes and adopted corrupt and illegal means in various matters. The defendant
could not prove the facts and was held liable by the Hon’ble court.

2. Fair Comment

Making fair comment on matters of public interest is a defence to an action of defamation.

For this defamation. For this defence to be available, the following essentials are required :

i.) It must be a comment, i.e., an expression of opinion rather than assertion of fact;

ii.) The comment must be fair; and

iii.) The matter commented upon must be of public interest.

3. Privilege

There are special occasions when the law recognizes that the right of free speech outweighs
the plaintiffs right to defamation and a defamatory statement made on such occasion is not
actionable.

Privileges are of two types.

1. Absolute Privilege
2. Qualified Privilege

Absolute Privilege

In matters of those, complete immunity is given to the person speaking and no action for
defamation will lie against him. It includes three aspects

Parliamentary proceedings– Article 105(2) of the Indian constitution offers immunity to

parliamentarians to talk something throughout the course of business of parliament and no
action would lie against them.

Judicial proceedings– This protection has been given to judges beneath judicial officers
protection act of 1850. It additionally extends to counsels, witnesses, and parties to a suit.

Qualified Privilege

This privilege is also available and under this, it is necessary that the statement must have
been made without malice i.e a wrongful intention.

Suggestions offered :

The litigant will recover damages for injury to his reputation also as his feelings.

Apology: An apology is another remedy offered to the plaintiff. This can be as a result of its
impact of correcting the impression antecedently created by the offending statement
concerning the plaintiff.

Injunctions: The Court could grant injunction restraining the publication of a libel. However
the litigant should initially prove that the calumnious statement is untrue and its publication
can cause irreparable injury to him.
REFERENCES

[1] D.P. Choudhary & Ors. v. Kumari Manjulata, A.I.R 1997 Raj 170

[2] Ram Jethmalani v. Subramaniam Swamy , A.I.R. 2006 Delhi 300

[3] T.V. Ramasubba Iyer And Anr. v. A.M.A. Mohindeen, A.I.R. 1972 Mad 398

[4] Mahendra Ram v. Harnandan Prasad, A.I.R. 1958 Pat. 445.

[5] Prameela Ravindran v. P. Lakshmikutty Amma, A.I.R. 2001 Mad. 225.

[6] Theaker v. Richardson, A.I.R. 1 A11 E.R. 229.

[7] Emmens v. Pottle, (1885) 16 Q.B.D. 354.

[8] Radheshyam Tiwari v. Eknath, A.I.R. 1985 Bom. 285.