LEGALIGHT SESSION-12

LI WHERE LAWYERS
ARE BORN.

MASTERCLASS
FOR CLAT
LEGAL
REASONING
1
STUDENT

MENTOR
LAW OF TORTS (DEFAMATION)
CONVERSATION
 LEGALIGHT
LI WHERE LAWYERS
ARE BORN.
MASTERCLASS
FOR CLAT

PRACTICE QUESTIONS  (NEW PATTERN)

Defamation is an injury to the reputation of a person. A defamatory statement is a statement calculated to expose a person to hatred,
contempt or ridicule, or to injure him in his trade, business, profession, calling or office, or to cause him to be shunned or avoided in
society.The offence of defamation consists of three essential ingredients: -
1. Making or publishing any imputation concerning any person.
2. Such imputation must have been made by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs, or by visible representations.
3.Such imputation must have been made with the intent to harm, or with knowledge or belief that it will harm the reputation of the
person concerned.
The wrong of defamation may be committed either by way of writing, or its equivalent, or by way of speech. The term 'libel' is used for
the former kind of utterances, 'slander' for the latter.A libel is a publication of a false and defamatory statement tending to injure the
reputation of another person without lawful justification or excuse. The statement must be expressed in some permanent form, e.g.,
writing, printing, pictures, statue, waxwork effigy, etc.A slander is a false and defamatory statement by spoken words or gestures
tending to injure the reputation of another.In order to find an action for libel, it must be proved that the statement complained of is: -
false, in writing, defamatory and published.Both libel and slander are criminal offences under IPC and both are actionable in Civil Court
without proof of special damage.The offence of defamation consists in the injury offered to reputation not in any breach of the peace or
other consequence that may result from it. The essence of the offence consists in its tendency to cause that description of pain, which
is felt by a person who knows himself to be the object of the unfavorable sentiments of his fellow creatures, and those inconveniences
to which a person who is the object of such unfavorable sentiments is exposed.Though there is no universal rule that to hold the
accused guilty of defamation the actual words used by the accused must be proved; it is nonetheless essential to prove the exact words
used in as much as the question whether certain words used are defamatory or not depends solely on the shade of their meaning in the
context in which they are used.
 LEGALIGHT
LI WHERE LAWYERS
ARE BORN.
MASTERCLASS
FOR CLAT

Q.1 Abhishek was journalist who noted down certain defamatory remarks against a politician, XYZ, in his diary. He used these notes
for reference in his daily show. On the show which was nationally televised he used certain defamatory references which he had
noted in front of the camera. Decide his liability.

A. Abhishek is liable for defamation because he published the defamatory statement infront of TV Televisio.
B. Abhishek is liable for defamation because being a part of press which is considered as the fourth pillar of democracy, he was not
supposed to lower down the reputation of a reputated politician
C. Abhishek is liable for defamation because he committed for libel and slander
D. Abhishek is not laible because he was expressing his opinion infront of public, regarding a corrupt politician, which was true and
in excercise of his fundamental right under article 19(1)(a).

Q.2 Rudra had been dating a girl named Kiara for three weeks.But he had introduced himself to heras Ricky Thakur (who is one of
Rudra's friends)and he continued to be Ricky for the rest of their relationship. But ultimately therelationship ended badly and Kiara
being upsetand angry at Rudra started awebsitenamed 'ricky-thakur-is-a-jerk.com'. She created this website so as to warn othergirls
about 'Ricky Thakur'. The real Ricky Thakur files a suit for defamation. Decide.
DECISION :
(a) Kiara shall be held liable for defamation as she published a statement which was injurious to Ricky's reputation.
(b) Rudra shall be held liable as he had led Kiara into thinking that he was RickyThakur and moreover, it was his fault in the first place
that made Kiara create this website.
(c) Kiara cannot be held liable as she had actually been referring to Rudra and notthe real Bicky Thakur.
(d) Kiara cannot be held liable as her act was done in good faith as she intended towards other girls.
 LEGALIGHT
LI WHERE LAWYERS
ARE BORN.
MASTERCLASS
FOR CLAT

Q.3 Facts: During a marriage ceremony, A circulated a pamphlet saying sister of the bride ‗S‘ is a thief, she has
stolen the shoes of the bridegroom. As per the information given above, which of the following statement is correct ?
(A) A defamed S because his reputation was lowered down infront of all guests who received the circular
(B) A did not defame "S" because "A" did not personally pointed "S"
(C) A defamed the bridegroom because he lowered the reputation of his sister-in-law.
(D) A defamed the whole of family of bride by publishing that sister of "S" is a theif.

Q.4 A person accused of a crime is arrested by the police. The police gives an open statement that the suspect had
an extra-martial affair. It is subsequently proved in court that the suspect was innocent of the crime. Will the accused
succeed if he files a civil suit for defamation, claiming compensation against the police?

a He will succeed as the statement is defamatory.

b He will not succeed as the police officer is doing his duty in finding a motive for the crime.
c He will not succeed as it was a bona fide allegation made by the police in the course of investigation.
d He will succeed if he can prove actual damage caused to his professional and personal life.
 LEGALIGHT
LI WHERE LAWYERS
ARE BORN.
MASTERCLASS
FOR CLAT

Q.5 Mr. Shankar was asked to pay money by some corrupt police officials who were investigating a case against him.
Annoyed by such corrupt practices of the government officers, he wrote an article on the state of corruption rampant
in the ruling government. The Secretary of the government filed a case for defamation against Mr. Shankar. Decide.

a Mr. Shankar cannot be held liable because his article is a lesson to the people engaged in corrupt practices.
b Mr. Shankar can be held liable because he has defamed the government as a whole and any government officer can
file a case against him.
c Mr. Shankar cannot be held liable as government is not a specific person.
d Mr. Shankar cannot be liable because he may have been instigated by his family members to write an article on
corruption