"Sticks and stones
will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"- says the
popular adage. The law of defamation, however, would be differing. The post
addresses the description of defamation and justifications about the
criminalization of it. The
crime of "defamation" is asserted against a "person" or
"persons" that damages his reputation or reputation. The intent to
cause harm is the most essential ingredient of a defamation crime that attracts
criminal action under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. There can be
no offense of defamation unless the alleged defamatory statement is made public
or published.
The word defamation has taken from Latin word
‘Diffamare’. Semantics or Etymology of the Latin word ‘Diffamare’ provides that
it means 'Spreading evil report about someone'. Thus, defamation is nothing but
causing damage to reputation of another.
In India this right is safeguarded both in civil law and
in criminal law. Defamation is both civil and criminal. Similarly, criminal law
codified on the subject, the civil law of defamation is not codified. The
criminal law on the subject is contained in sections 499 to 502 of the Criminal
Code of India, 1860. However, defamation as a Civil Evil is covered by the
Crimes Act. It is based purely on previous developments, that is, through
decisions made by the courts. The rules and principles of responsibility that
are applied by our courts are mostly those taken from the common law.
- CRIMINAL DEFAMATION IN INDIA
Second. 499 of the IPC defines defamation as "Any
person who, in words, whether spoken or intended to be read, by signs or by
visible representation, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person
who attempts to harm, or know or have Reasons to believe that such imputation
The IPC will then proceed to provide ten exceptions that include the defence of
the truth, an opinion expressed in good faith on a public servant, Judicial
decision, witness behaviour, public action or for the good of a person, Etc. An
exception is also made to express an opinion, which is substantially true for
the public good. Sec.500
also charges the offender with a punishment of "simple imprisonment for a
term that may be extended to 2 years or with a fine or with both".
The elements of defamation include (i) making a false
statement and (ii) "tending to lower a person in the estimation of members
of correct thinking of society" Therefore, the crime of defamation is
against the right of reputation. That an individual enjoys. Reputation has been
defined as "the estimate in which a person is held by others, the
character that imputes him in the community or the society to which he
belongs." It is a generally accepted principle that all members of society
have the right of ensuring that their reputation in society is not adversely
affected by the false statement or publication of another individual.
Defamation
is a motive by which a constitutional limitation to the right to freedom of
expression, as mentioned in Article 19 (2), can be legally imposed.
Thus, the term "defamation" has received constitutional status. This
word includes expressions such as defamation and defamation encompassing many
other defamation species, Such as obscene libels, seditious libels and
blasphemous libels, and so on. The defamation law does not violate the right to freedom of
expression guaranteed by article 19 (1) (a).
"It was observed that, the Court has to apply the
rules of fairness, justice and good conscience." The person defamation can
file a claim for damages and the publication of a defamatory statement can be
restricted by a judicial order, either under Articles 38 or 39 of the Specific
Assistance Act of 1963. The plaintiff in a defamation action must cite the
exact words pronounced by the defamatory so that the Court can decide whether
they are capable of defamatory meaning. "
Defamation can be committed in two ways, namely: (i)
speaking, or (ii) in writing and its equivalent ways. The English Common Law
describes the first as "SLANDER" and the second as "LIBEL".
The first is a spoken defamation, while the second is a written defamation that
can take various forms, such as physical symbols, statues, effigies, image,
caricature, wax model, etc.. Slander has also been attributed several ways. It
can be committed by representations or other ways that are treated as
equivalent to the word, such as shaking the head, nodding, nodding, whistling,
and many others. Although under the common law of England distinction is made
between the two in several respects, but in India such distinction has not been
made.
Slander can be the result of a sudden sharp provocation
in the heat of the moment, while defamation involves a richer deliberation and
raises a suggestion of malice. Defamation is likely to do more harm to the
defamed person than slander. Because there is a strong tendency on the part of
most people to believe anything they see in print.
The criminal law on the subject is contained in Articles
499 to 502 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860. The penalty and penalty for the
offense of defamation are provided for in Article 500 of the IPC. But article
499 speaks of a dozen exceptions on what cannot be called defamation:
1.)First exception:
Imputation of the truth whose public good must be made or published:
It is not defamation to impute anything that is true
about any person, if it is for the public good that the imputation must be made
or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a matter of fact.
2.)Second Exception:
Public Conduct of Public Servants:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion
concerning the conduct of an official in the performance of his public duties
or the respect for his character, insofar as His character appears in this
conduct.
3.)Third Exception:
Conduct of Any Person Affecting a Public Question:
It is not a defamation to express in good faith any
opinion as to the conduct of a person and respecting its character, insofar as
its character appears in this conduct, and no longer.
4,)Fourth Exception:
Publication proceedings of court proceedings:
It is not defamatory to publish a genuinely authentic
report of the deliberations of a Court of Justice or the outcome of such
proceedings.
5,)Fifth Exception: Merits
the case decided in court or the conduct of witnesses and other persons
concerned:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion
concerning the merits of a case, whether civil or criminal, decided by a Court
Of justice, or concerning the conduct of a person as a party, witness or agent,
or by respecting the character of that person, to the extent that his character
appears in that conduct, and no longer.
6.)Sixth Exception: Merits
of public performance:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion
on the merits of any performance which the author has submitted to the judgment
of the public or on the character of the author to the extent that his
character appears in such performance and not .
7.)Seventh Exception:
Censure passed in good faith by person having lawful authority over another:
This is not defamation in a person having on another
authority, conferred by law or arising from a lawful contract concluded with
another, to pass in good faith any censorship on the conduct of that other
person.
8.)Eighth Exception:
Favourable Charges in Good Faith to the Authorized Person:
It is not defamatory to prefer in good faith a charge
against a person to one who has the lawful authority over that person in
respect of the person Object of the charge.
9.)Ninth exception: Charge
made in good faith by a person to protect his interests or those of others:
It is not defamatory to impute the character another
person Provided that the charge which is made in good faith for the protection
of the interest of the person who makes it or any other person or for the
public good. It was that the person alleging in good faith must establish the
fact that before making any allegation that he had made an investigation and
the relevant reasons and facts given by him must indicate that he acted
diligence and That he was satisfied The truth of the allegation. Five important
considerations must be kept in mind while establishing good faith and good
faith.
A. The circumstances in which the letter was written or
the words spoken;
B. If there was malice;
C. If the Appellant has made an inquiry before making the
allegations;
D. If there are reasons to accept the version that he
acted with care and caution; and
E. The question of whether there is a balance of
probability that the appellant acted in good faith.
10.)Tenth Exception:
Caution intended for good of person to who conveyed or for public good:
It is not a defamation to give a warning in good faith to
one person against another, provided that the warning is for the benefit of the
person to whom it is transmitted or of any interested person. Chapter XXI,
Articles 500, 501 and 502 of the IPC deal with the sanction for defamation.
The severity of the crime and whether it justified the
liberty limiting punishment of criminal sanctions. While there is harm to the
reputation of the victim, the penalty under Sec. 500 is far too harsh and
restrictive for it to be justified. The position of law under other
jurisdictions was also considered.
Defamation
is civil as well as criminal wrong. Likewise the codified criminal law on the
subject, the civil law of defamation is not codified. The criminal law on the
topic is contained in sectioned 499 to 502 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
However, defamation as a Civil Wrong is covered under Law of Torts. It is
purely based on precedential developments, i.e. through decisions pronounced by
Courts. Rules and principles of liability that are applied by our courts are
mostly those borrowed from common law.
Comments
Post a Comment