Introduction:

Article 21 in the Indian Constitution is a part of the fundamental rights and

ensures a person’s right to live with dignity, safeguarding their reputation,
prestige, etc. Additionally, Article 19 of the Indian Constitution grants Indian
citizens the right of freedom of speech. However, this right is not absolute as
Article 19(2) mandates the state to enact laws imposing “reasonable
restrictions,” which include the defamation laws in India.
The Constitution of India grants its citizens with the fundamental right of
freedom of speech subject to reasonable restrictions.
Defamation is defined under section 499 of the IPC and the punishment for it is
dealt with in section 500. IPC defines defamation as any spoken, written, or
visual statement about any person damaging their reputation.
While section 499 of the IPC defines defamation, section 500 states punishment
for the same.
According to section 500 any person who defames another person is subject to
punishment, which shall include fine, or imprisonment which shall not exceed
more than two years or both.

Defamation under law of Tort

Defamation is also punishable under law of torts. Here the punishment
for the defendant is to pay the monetary compensation for legal
damage suffered by the plaintiff.
A Tort is a Civil Wrong. It deals with the rights and obligations people
owe to others and the infringement of these rights and obligations.
The purpose of law of torts is to provide compensation or damages to
the people whose rights have been violated.

Law of torts is separated into categories and includes:

 Negligence
 Defamation
 Nuisance
 Trespass

Defamation
Defamation by nature is both a civil and criminal offence.
In civil law, defamation is punishable under the Law of Torts by
imposing punishment in the form of damages awarded to the
aggrieved party.
In Criminal law, Defamation is a bailable, non-cognizable offence and
can be compounded.

Defamation means to defame someone, to tarnish someone’s

image/reputation in the society. And law of defamation aims at
protecting the character of individuals against attempts to discredit
their standing in the eyes of the community.
A statement or other published material therefore is regarded to be
defamatory if it lowers the reputation of the plaintiff in the eyes of the
community.

Defamation falls into two categories:

 Libel- A statement made in a permanent form, either written
[including radio/ T.V] that lowers the reputation of a person in
the eyes of the community. A person may sue for libel without
proving the actual harm or loss.
 Slander- A statement made in a non- permanent form by word
of mouth. A person will only succeed in an action for slander if
they prove they suffered a loss.
Hence, libel is a defamatory statement published in the press or
otherwise, while slander is oral defamation.
Libelous statements are divided into following four categories:
a) Exciting hatred, contempt, scorn or ridicule
b) To be shunned or avoided by society
c) Affecting profession, calling or office
d) Affecting trade or business
To succeed in a claim of defamation a plaintiff must
prove two elements which are:-

 Publication- the material or statement was “published” either to

a media or a group of people or by being overheard by another
person.
 Identification- the material or statement referred to the plaintiff
either directly or indirectly and that statement lowered the
reputation of the plaintiff.

Defenses to Defamation
 Justification
 Contextual truth
 Absolute truth
 Fair report of proceeding of public concern
 Qualified privilege
 Honest opinion
 Innocent dissemination
 Triviality

 Justification- this defense is used when the statement which is

made is true.
For example: a person tells a group of people that other person
has been convicted of theft if however the person had been
charged but not convicted, then it won’t be true.
The court assumes that the statement is false. The defense has to
prove that it is true.

 Contextual truth- applies when the defendant is can show that,

in addition to material complained by plaintiff, the plaintiff
contains one or more statements that are substantially true.
 For example: if a newspaper publishes an article that is
substantially true, but states amongst other matters that Bill
Smith has been convicted of armed robbery it is unlikely to
harm Bill Smith’s reputation.

 Absolute privilege- some members of the public are able to

make comments without the threat of being sued for defamation
because they can claim privilege. This particularly refers to
politicians who can say what they like in the house of
parliament and not be sued for defamation. This is known as
absolute privilege.

 Fair report of proceedings of public concern- applies when a

defendant publishes a fair report of any proceedings. Public
inquiries, local government proceedings, a public shareholder
meeting, or proceeding of a sports or recreation association.

 Qualified privilege- may be argued in a limited range of

situations where the defendant can show that the persons
receiving the publication have an interest in the subject and that
the defendant’s conduct in publishing the material is reasonable
in the circumstances. Situations where this defence may be used
include comments made in the course of writing a reference for
someone, and statements made to the police. However, a
defendant who abuses the privilege by being motivated by
malice [spite] is not protected by this defence.

 Honest opinion- applies if the defendant can show that:

[a] the matter was an expression of opinion rather than a
statement of fact
[b] that the opinion relates to matter of public interest
[c] that the opinion based on proper material.
Critical statements made by a reporter as part of a review of an
art show, a music performance or a movie can be regarded as an
honest opinion.
  Innocent dissemination- applies if the defendant can show they
unknowingly old or distributed a defamatory publication. The
defense protects person such as book seller, news agents,
libraries or web the provider pf electronic services such as
internet websites. The defense will fail if the plaintiff can show
the defendant knew or ought to have known the material was
defamatory.

 Triviality- applies in circumstances where it is unlikely that the

plaintiff will sustain any harm. An example is publication of
material that is mildly offensive to the plaintiff.

Who can sue for damage to reputation/defamation/

 An individual who has been defamed.
 An office [such as king or president]
 An institution [such as the army]
 A group of people [such as religious denomination], if they are
not individually defamed.
 A representative [such as a family member] of dead person who
has been defamed.

Statements that are not defamatory [based on judgments

of the European Court of Human Rights]
 Statements that are true
 Statements that are privileged [spoken in a parliament or in a
court, or is a report of those proceedings]
 Statements that are opinion or a satire
 Statements that are a reasonable publication- the journalist made
good faith efforts to verify and the publication is in the public
interest.
  The defamatory opinion is a statement of someone else [and the
journalist does not support it]

What could a court do if it finds that a person has been

defamed
 Require a correction/apology to be published
 Award monetary damages for any loss that can be proved to
results from the defamation.
 Award “non-pecuniary damages”- A monetary award to
compensate “a moral suffering”.

Any monetary award should:

 Not create a “chilling effect” on media reporting
 Consider the actual damage and suffering caused by the
defamation
 Consider the financial means available to the
journalist/publication.

Content:
 Introduction
 Defamation under law
of torts
 What is defamation and
its nature?
 Categories of
defamation
 Defense to defamation
 Who can sue for
defamation
 Statements that are not
defamatory
 What a court can do if it
finds that a person has
been defamed?

Conclusion:
Reputation is an asset to each and every one. Any
damage to such asset can be legally dealt with.
Defamation laws have been enacted to prevent
person maliciously using their right to freedom of
speech and expression. The Indian law has rightly
not made any distinction between libel and slander.
Otherwise there could have been chances for
committing slander and escaping from the laws
that there is no written publication of matter.
Intentional act of defamation is also punished with
imprisonment which prohibits defaming a person
with malice intention. The defamation law is also
constitutional and is reasonable restriction on the
right to free speech and expression. However, it is
no defamation if the if the acts done fall within the
exceptions provided.