Defamation in Law of Torts: Meaning, essentials and defences UNIT 2

Meaning– Defamation is injury to the reputation of a person. If a person injures the reputation of
another he does so at his own risk, as in the case of an interference with the property. A man’s
reputation is his property, and if possible, more valuable, than other property.

Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation;
decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging,
hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person, is called defamation.

Definitions: Scrutton LJ defined a defamatory statement as ‘a false statement about a man to his
discredit’.

In the words of Dr. Winfield “Defamation is the publication of a statement which tends to lower a
person in the estimation of right thinking members of the society, generally or, which tends to make
them shun or avoid that person.”

Criminal and Civil Defamation– Defamation may be a civil charge or a criminal charge under Section
499 and 500 of IPC.

Criminal Defamation: For criminal defamations, you could always get the liable person or party
prosecuted. It is studied in IPC as a criminal act.

Civil Defamation: For Civil defamation, you could sue the person to get a legal compensation.for your
defamation. It is studied under law of torts i.e. as a civil wrong

Defamation is of two kinds Libel and Slander. If the statement is made in writing and published in
some permanent and visible form, then the defamation is called libel. Whereas, if the statement is
made by some spoken words then the defamation is called slander.

Libel and Slander-

English Law: Mainly because of historical reasons, English law divides actions for defamation into
Libel and Slander.

Libel is a representation made in a permanent form like writing, movie, picture etc. For e.g., X
printed some advertisement saying Y is bankrupt but Y was not thus it was representation in a
specific form.

Slander, on the other hand is the publication of a defamatory statement in transient form like
spoken words or gestures. For e.g., A questions the chastity of B in an interview, A is slanderous.

Distinction between Libel and Slander–

- -Libel is addressed to the eye while slander to the ear.

- -In English Criminal law, only libel has been recognized as an offence, slander is no offence. -In
Indian law, both are criminal offences under Section 499 and 500 of IPC.
-Under law of torts, slander is actionable and libel is actionable per se.

What the victim must prove to establish that defamation occurred

If the victim has to win a lawsuit relating to defamation, then the victim has to prove the following
essentials:

1) Statement- There must be a statement which can be spoken, written, pictured or even gestured.

2) Publication- For a statement to be published, a third party must have seen, heard or read the
defamatory statement. If there is no publication there is no injury of reputation and no action will
arise.

3) Injury- The above statement must have caused an injury to the subject of the statement. It means
that the statement must tend to injure the reputation of a person to whom it refers.

4) Falsity- The defamatory statement must be false. If the statement is not false then the statement
will not be considered as defamatory statement.

5) Unprivileged- In order for a statement to be defamatory, it must be unprivileged. There are

certain circumstances, under which a person cannot sue someone for defamation.

Defences available under defamation

The following are the defences taken in an action for defamation:-

1) Justification of truth-

If the defendant proves that the defamatory statement is true, no action will lie for it, even if the
statement is published maliciously. It is sufficient if it is true in substance.

2) Fair and bonafide comment-

A fair and bonafide comment on a matter of public interest is a defence in an action for defamation.
The essentials of a fair comment are:

(i) That it is comment or criticism and not a statement of fact,

(ii) That the comment is on a matter of public interest,

(iii) That the comment is fair and honest.

3) Privileged statement-

Law makers have decided that one cannot sue for defamation in certain instances when a statement
is considered privileged. Whether a statement is privileged or unprivileged is policy decision that
rests on the shoulders of the lawmakers.

It gives the person an absolute right to make the statement even if it is defamatory, the person is
immune from liability arising out of defamation lawsuit. Generally, privilege exempts defamatory
statements made:
during judicial proceedings,

by legislators during debates in the parliament,

communication between spouses.

Case Laws:-

The plaintiff (herself a Princess) complained that she could be identified with the character Princess
Natasha in the film ‘Rasputin, the Mad Monk’. On the basis that the film suggested that, by reason of
her identification with ‘Princess Natasha’, she had been seduced by Rasputin. The defendant
contended that if the film indicated any relations between Rasputin and ‘Natasha’ it indicated a rape
of Natasha and not a seduction.

Held- In a cinema film, not only the photographic part of it is considered to be libel but also the
speech which synchronises with it also. Slesser LJ said that defamation could include words which
cause a person to be shunned or avoided: ‘not only is the matter defamatory if it brings the plaintiff
into hatred, ridicule, or contempt by reason of some moral discredit on [the plaintiff’s] part, but also
if it tends to make the plaintiff be shunned and avoided and that without any moral discredit on [the
plaintiff’s] part.Thus she was awarded with damages.

In D.P. Choudhary v. Kumari Manjulata case

The plaintiff – respondent Manjulata about 17 years of age belonged to a distinguished family and
studied B.A. There was a publication of a news item in a local daily Dainik Navjyoti that last night she
ran away with a boy named Kamlesh; but she had gone to attend night classes. The news item was
untrue and negligently published with utter irresponsibility. She was shocked and ridiculed by
others. It was held that the action was defamatory and she was entitled with the damages of Rs
10000/- by way of general damages.

In Ramdhara v. Phulwatibai case

It has been held that the imputation by the defendant that the plaintiff, a widow of 45 year age, is a
keep of the maternal uncle of the plaintiff’s daughter-in-law, is not a mere vulgar abuse but a
definite imputation upon her chastity and thus constitutes defamation.