Defamation Laws in India: Balancing Freedom of Speech and Protection of Reputation

Abstract

This article examines defamation laws in India. It covers how defamation laws balance between freedom of speech and protecting the reputation of individuals. It discussed landmark judgements that have interpreted defamation and provided justice to the individual. It also suggested some reforms that will help in protecting the reputation of an individual.

Introduction

The Constitution of India provides freedom of speech to its entire citizens in order to protect their reputation. Every man is entitled to the protection of his reputation. More valuable than any material possessions is a man’s reputation. Defamation is the act of attacking someone’s reputation. Salmon states that “publishing a false and defamatory statement about another person without a valid reason or excuse constitutes the wrong of defamation.” Defamation is of two types: Libel (written or published defamation) and Slander (spoken defamation). There are several laws made in order to protect the reputation of individuals. Defamation is both a civil and criminal offence in India. Freedom of speech is given to all individuals but this right is not absolute it is subject to some restriction.

Legal framework for defamation in India

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Defamation is defined under section 499 of the IPC. “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”.[1]

The punishment for defamation is provided under section 500 of IPC. “Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both”.[2]

Essentials of Defamation

• The statement must be defamatory
• The statement must refer to the plaintiff
• The statement must be published

Types of defamation

Libel: It means it is a publication of a false and defamatory statement in some permanent form. Examples- writing, picture, image, statue etc. It is both a civil and criminal offence. Libel is actionable per se in all cases. It shows greater deliberation and is done with malicious intention.

Slander: It is an untrue, defamatory comment made orally or in writing that tends to damage someone else’s reputation without a valid reason or excuse. It is non-actionable per se. It is only a civil wrong. It is generally uttered in the heat of the moment and under sudden provocation. Slander is generally regarded as being addressed to ears. Exception: The sign language or finger language of a deaf and dumb person who is visible to the eye and not audible to the ear is slander.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

Section 199:- Prosecution for Defamation

The court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under sections 499 and 500 of IPC only when a complaint is made by the aggrieved party. Provided that if such person is a minor, or an idiot or lunatic or is suffering from sickness or infirmity then some other person with the leave of the court make a complaint on his or her behalf. The complaint should be made within six months from which the offence has been committed.[3]

Civil Defamation

Civil defamation means any injury or harm caused to a person’s reputation. It is generally regarded as a tort. Section 19 of CPC talks about both the offence and the effect of committing the offence. Any person who has faced defamation can bring suit under section 19 of CPC.[4]

A complaint can be filed for defamation to the Magistrate by the plaintiff. The magistrate then orders a police officer to start the investigation regarding the offence. Compensation or damages shall be given to the plaintiff for civil defamation. “However the word defamation is not written particularly under section 19 of CPC but as the personal right of the person or individual is infringed then of course he can bring an action in civil court.”[5]

Other laws related to defamation

Article 19 (1) (a): Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression

“All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression”[6]. It is a fundamental right under the constitution of India. This right is not absolute there are reasonable restrictions imposed on this right. “The state can make laws and can impose reasonable restriction on this right in the interest of the public to protect the security of the state and in order to avoid defamation and incitement to an offence”.[7] We have the right of freedom of speech but being a responsible citizen we must exercise this right without causing any discomfort to others. The balance between our rights and responsibility should be maintained in order to avoid defamation.

Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000

66A: Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.* –

Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,-

(a) Any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or

(b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device; or

(c) Any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages,

Shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with a fine.

Explanation:- For the purpose of this section, the terms “electronic mail” and “electronic mail message” mean a message or information created or transmitted or received on a computer, computer system, computer resource or communication device including attachments in text, image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message.[8]

Landmark judgement and Judicial Interpretation

Subramanian Swamy v Union of India

In this case, a petition was filed under Article 32 in order to challenge the constitutional validity of the Criminal Defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC. The court has interpreted both defamation and reputation. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and held that Criminal Defamation under sections 499 and 500 of IPC is constitutionally valid.[9]

Chanman Lal v State of Punjab

Chanman Lal who was the president of the Municipal Committee passed a defamatory statement against Bishan Kaur, a nurse.[10] This was an offence under section 500 of IPC. “Supreme court held that if any statement is made in good faith and bonafide intention then it falls under exception of section 499 of IPC. “ In this case, the appeal was rejected holding that there was no reasonable cause for passing such defamatory statement”.[11]

Shreya Singhal v Union of India

It is a landmark case where two girls were arrested for offences under section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for posting “offensive” or menacing comments on Facebook.[12] Shreya Singhal, the petitioned challenged that section 66A of ITA violates the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Indian constitution. “The Supreme Court ruled that section 66A of ITA 2000 is unconstitutional”.[13] 

Reforms and Suggestions for Improvement

There are defamation laws in our country but sometimes this law is misused. Defamation is regarded as offences as per the provision of IPC which make it even worse and cause problems if it is misused. The punishment for defamation provided under section 500 is very harsh and sometimes this is not proportionate to the harm caused.

There are many cases in which an action is brought with a malicious intention. The court should impose penalties on such cases in order to prevent such malicious litigation. Reformation should be made to provide justice and protection to journalists who report on public interest matters moreover awareness of the law is also an effective step as it encourages media literacy.

Decriminalization of defamation is another way to improve defamation laws in India. There are two types of defamation, one is criminal defamation and the other is civil defamation. There is no need for criminal defamation because it will create a burden on the court as there are provisions given in CPC to bring a suit if any harm is done to an individual and he will be compensated accordingly. Legislation should pass laws in order to bring reforms to defamation and to make it fair for all.

Conclusion

Defamation laws aim to protect individual reputations and maintain the balance between freedom of speech and reputation. Although it has been misused sometimes, but judiciary played a crucial role in affirming that both freedom of speech and reputation are crucial for an individual dignity and play an important role in society. There are some landmark judgments that have interpreted Article 19 (9) (a) and reputation.[14] However, in order for an effective democratic system these laws need to be changed or reformed and parliament should amend the laws as per the needs and betterment of society.

Reference(s):

[1] Indian Penal Code 1860, s 499

[2] Indian Penal Code 1860, s 500

[3] Criminal Procedure Code 1973, s 199

[4] Civil Procedure Code 1908, s 19

[5] Monesh Mehndiratta, ‘How To File A Defamation Case In India’ (ipleader, 3 June 2022) <https://blog.ipleaders.in/how-to-file-a-defamation-case-in-india/ >  accessed  6 November 2024

[6] Constitution Of India 1950, art 19(1)(a)

[7] Constitution Of India 1950, art 19(4)

[8] Information Technology Act 2000, s 66A

[9] Subramanian Swamy v Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 221

[10] Chanman Lal v State of Punjab Ministry Of Law & Ors (1970)  8 SC 1567

[11] Ibid

[12] Shreya Singhal v Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1

[13] Khushi Malviya, ‘Case Analysis Of Shreya Singhal v U.O.I: Constitutional Validity Of Section 66A Of Information Technology Act, 2000” (Lawoctopus, 22 October 2024)< https://lawctopus.com/clatalogue/clat-pg/shreya-singhal-v-uoi-constitutional-validity-of-section-66a/> accessed 6 November 2024

[14] Constitution Of India 1950, art 19(9)(a)