Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Table of Contents
Introduction
Section 499
Ingredients
Section 500
Section 501
Section 502
2
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Introduction
Defamation has been defined under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 500 of the Code prescribes punishment for the offence of defamation. Other
sections related to the offence of defamation are S. 501 and S. 502. However, every
statement or action made by a person, lessening the repute of another cannot said to
be defamatory if it falls within any of the ten exceptions to s. 499 of the IPC.
3
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Illustrations
(a) A says-"Z is an honest man; he never stole B's watch" ; intending to cause it to
be believed that Z did steal B's watch. This is defamation, unless it fall within one of
the exceptions.
4
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
(b) A is asked who stole B's watch. A points to Z, intending to cause it to be believed
that Z stole B's Watch. This is defamation unless it fall within one of the exceptions.
(c) A draws a picture of Z running away with B's watch, intending it to be believed
that Z stole B's watch. This is defamation, unless it fall within one of the exceptions.
Illustration
5
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
canvassing for a particular candidate for any situation in the efficient discharge of
the duties of which the public is interested.
Explanation-A justice of the Peace or other officer holding an inquiry in open Court
preliminary to a trial in a Court of Justice, is a Court within the meaning of the
above section.
Illustrations
(a) A says-"I think Z's evidence on that trial is so contradictory that he must be stupid
or dishonest". A is within this exception if he says this in good faith, inasmuch as the
opinion which he express respects Z's character as it appears in Z's conduct as a
witness, and no further.
(b) But if A says-"I do not believe what Z asserted at that trial because I know him
to be a man without veracity" ; A is not within this exception, inasmuch as the
opinion which he express of Z's character, is an opinion not founded on Z's conduct
as a witness.
6
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Illustrations
(a) A person who publishes a book, submits that book to the judgment of the public.
(b) A person who makes a speech in public, submits that speech to the judgment of
the public.
(c) An actor or singer who appears on a public stage, submits his acting or signing
in the judgment of the public.
(d) A says of a book published by Z-"Z's book is foolish; Z must be a weak man. Z's
book is indecent; Z must be a man of impure mind". A is within the exception, if he
says this in good faith, in as much as the opinion which he express of Z respects Z's
character only so far as it appears in Z's book, and no further.
(e) But if A says-"I am not surprised that Z's book is foolish and indecent, for he is
a weak man and a libertine". A is not within this exception, inasmuch as the opinion
which he expresses of Z's character is an opinion not founded on Z's book.
pass in good faith any censure on the conduct of that other in matters to which such
lawful authority relates.
Illustration
Illustration
8
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Illustrations
Ingredients:
Makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person.- every such person
who is engaged in composing, dictating, writing or in any way contributing to the
9
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
making of libel is the maker of the libel. In N. L. Shah v. Patel Maganbhai Revabhai
and another 1 , an interesting situation arose for decision. There was agitation of
lawyers in Gujarat in connection with appointment and transfer of Chief Justices of
High Courts. An editorial in a newspaper criticized this agitation. The lawyers were
inter alia described as “Kajia Dalal” i.e. dispute broker, in the editorial. In a suit for
defamation against editor, the Gujarat High Court held that the editorial did not refer
to the complainant personally or to any other individual but referred to the lawyers
as a class and at the most the lawyers of Gujarat. The words Kajia Dalal was held
to be used in relation to the lawyers as a class and is not referable to a determinate
section of lawyers, namely, the lawyers who were participating in the agitation.
Hence no defamation was done by the editor.
In Ashok Kumar Jain and Others v State of Maharashtra2, it was held that
where a defamatory statement against a person is published in a newspaper, the
editor, printer and publisher who has made declaration and is shown in paper as such
is liable. Where it is alleged that the Chairman of Board of Directors of Company
and its General Manager took part in selling out newspaper, it is indicative of the
fact that they had prior knowledge of defamatory matter in paper which they could
have prevented but they did not, they would be guilty of the offence.
In Shahrukh Khan v. State of Rajasthan and ors.3 under the direction of Mr.
Rajiv Mehra, a Hindi film Ram Jaane was released for public viewing after due
certification by the Central Board of Certification ('the Board', for short). The
Petitioner played the role of the protagonist in the film. In the later part of the film,
the hero is tried for triple murders. In the courtroom scene, the defense lawyer gets
1
1984 Cr. L.J. 1790 (Guj.)
2
1986 Cr. L.J. 1987 (Bom.)
3
RLW 2008 (1) Raj 809
10
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
up to defend the hero who is, however, bent upon confessing his crime. He, therefore,
questions the conduct of the lawyer and says:
(This lawyer well knows that I have killed the three persons, yet he tries to save me.
Why? For the sake of money, no? For the sake of money, he sells his morals. He
sells the laws. By selling the laws, you people have turned life into a misery.)
(English translation of the Hindi dialogue)
The respondents filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Shah Rukh Khan (the
Petitioner), Mr. Rajiv Mehra (the director), Mr. Pravesh Mehra (the producer), Mr.
ShriKant Sharma (the co-scriptwriter), Ms. Juhi Chawla (the heroine), and M/s
Vinayak Film Industries (the distributors in Rajasthan), and M/s Unkown
Distributors (distributors for India) alleging defamation and criminal conspiracy,
offences Under Section s 500,501 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
It was held by the Rajasthan High Court that the law requires that the
defamatory statement, in order to be actionable, be made against a definite and an
identifiable group. The remark made by the petitioner was applicable to the lawyers
as a community. Thus, a group of lawyers could not file a complaint against the
petitioner for offence Under Section s 499 and 500 IPC. Therefore, the complaint is
not maintainable.
11
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
defamation has been used to denote what is known as libel and slander in England.
The words visible representation will include every possible form of defamation
which ingenuity can devise. Thus a statue, an effigy, chalk marks on wall, signs or
pictures may constitute a libel, in addition to words spoken.
This exception and exception 4 requires that the imputation should be true.
The remaining exceptions require that it should be made in good faith. It is also
necessary that truth when set up as a defence must extend to the entire defamation
and not only to a part of it.
Where the imputation is good but it is not published for public good but only
for a community such a publication cannot held to be good.
12
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
The Supreme Court in this case observed that-“ what the accused had
published was an accurate and true report of the proceedings of the Assembly.
Involvement of the respondent was disclosed by the preliminary inquiry made by the
Government. If the accused bona fide believing the version of the Minister to be true
published the report in good faith it cannot be said that they intended to harm the
reputation of the complainant.”
It was held In re Arundhati Roy5, that a person claiming the benefit of second
exception to section 499 IPC is required to shoe that the opinion expressed by him
was in good faith which related to the conduct of a public servant in discharge of his
public functions or respecting his character appears in that conduct.
Exception 3- the conduct of publicists who take part in politics or other matters
concerning the public can be commented in good faith. In construing a document the
courts are not concerned with what the parties intended but with language actually
employed.
4
AIR 1998 SC 2117
5
2002 Cr. L.J. 1792 (SC)
13
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Exception 4- this exception requires that the report of the proceedings of a court of
justice should be without malice. It should be fair and accurate report of what took
place before tribunal. This exception does not require good faith. It is not confined
to judgment and orders but also covers pleadings whether relevant or not.
In T. Satish Pai v. Narayan Nayak 6 , it was held that once FIR is lodged
alleging commission of offences under IPC and public authorities take cognizance
of the same initiating necessary legal action, report published in newspaper of any
of the proceedings relating to crime giving contents of FIR would not amount to
defamation. Publication of such news item will squarely fall within fourth exception
of Section 499, IPC and proceedings against journalist is not sustainable.
Exception 7- this exception allows a person under whose authority others have been
placed either by their consent or by law to censure in good faith, those who are so
placed under his authority so far as regard matters to which that authority relates. A
6
2002 Cri. L.J. 4416 (Karnataka)
14
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
Municipal engineer reported to the Municipality that stock of meal was taken away
by the contractor. It was held that the if the report being made was in good faith this
exception will apply 7 . Statements made by a person during police investigation
merely expressing suspicion as to complicity of certain person in crime will not
amount to defamation.
1. That the person to whom the complaint was made had lawful authority over
the officer complained against
2. That the accusation was made in good faith
It is necessary for the application of this exception that the complaint is bona fide
and not made with the intention to injure anyone. A complaint to a police constable
is not privileged and will not fall under this exception.
Exception 9- where a defamatory statement is made in good faith for the protection
of the interest of the person making it, this exception will come into operation.
Interest of the person has to be real and legitimate, e.g. where a notice was issued on
behalf of a Hindu widow, charging with criminal breach of trust and the reply of the
accused was that the widow was living an immoral life, it was held that the exception
applied.
Exception 10- for attracting this exception it must be proved that the accused
intended in good faith to convey a caution to one person against another, intending
for the good of the person to whom the caution was conveyed or to some person in
7
J.N. Mukherjee, AIR 1934 Pat. 548
15
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
whom the person is interested or for public good. The caution is intended to be given
to the person to whom it is intended. The imputation must be made in good faith.
16
TOPIC- DEFAMATION
References:
17