Defamation under Indian Penal Code, 1860
Chapter XXI
It
includes law regarding defamation and is contained under sections 499 – 502.
Defamation: It is being included in tort as
well as in crime. In case of civil suit for defamation, it is being filed for
recovering damages and in case of crime it is being punishable in section 500
of IPC.
Section
499 defines whoever by;
ü words either spoken or intended
to be read,
ü or by signs or
ü visible representation makes or
publishes any imputation (attributing of actions to a source)
ü concerning any person
ü intending to harm (or knowing to
believe that such imputation will harm) the reputation of such person is said
to
ü defame that person
Explanations
of Section 499:Defamation to impute anything;
(a) To a deceased person, if the
imputation (i) would harm the reputation of that person, if living, and (ii) is
intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or near relatives
(b) Concerning a company or
association of persons or collection of persons as such
(c) In the form of an alternative or
expressed ironically; for instance –
(1)
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 falls
within one of the exceptions.
(2)
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 falls within one
of the exceptions.
(3)
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 falls within one of the
exceptions
(d) If it directly, or indirectly,
lowers, in the reputation of others –
(i)
The
moral or intellectual character of the person, or
(ii)
The
character of that person in respect of his caste, or calling, or
(iii)
The
credit of the person; or
(iv)
If
it causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome
state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful
Difference in
English law and Indian Law
Under
English law, the essence of the crime of defamation is related to breach of
peace while in Indian Penal Code, defamation has been made an offence to cause
mental pain and suffering to the person defamed, who becomes the object of
unfavorable sentiments of his fellow-men.
Under
English law, spoken words do not constitute a criminal offence, whereas under
IPC, there is no difference between slander (oral defamation) and libel
(written defamation).
Hence,
defamation
includes:
·
Slander:
Oral Defamation and
·
Libel:
Written defamation
Exceptions or
Defenses of Defamation:
1. Public
Good: It is not
defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person if it is for
the public good that the imputation should be made or published. When truth is
set up as a defense, it must extend to the entire libel, and it would not be
sufficient if only a part of the libel is proved to be true.
2. Public
Conduct of Public Servants:
It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting
the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public functions in
respect, so far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further.
Every citizen has a right to
comment on those acts of public men which concern him as a citizen of the
country, as long as he does not misuse such a right as a cloak for malice and
slander. Those who fill in public positions also render themselves, though
unpleasant, appendage to the office.
3. Conduct
of ant person touching any public questions: For example – it is not defamation in A to express
in good faith any opinion whatever respecting Z’s conduct in petitioning. So it
is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatsoever respecting
the conduct of any person touching any public question and respecting his
character so far as his character appears in that conduct and no further.
4. Reports
of proceedings of Courts:
It is not defamation to publish a substantially true report of a Court of
Justice, or the result of any such proceedings.
5. Merits
of a case or conduct of witnesses:
It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting
the merits of any case, civil or criminal, which has been decided by a Court of
Justice or respecting the conduct of any person as a party, witness or agent,
in any such case, or respecting the character of such person, so far as his
character appears in that conduct.
6. Merits
of public performance:
It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion respecting the merits
of any performance which its author has submitted to the judgment of the public
(expressly or impliedly), or respecting the character appears in such
performance, and no further.
7. Bona
fide Censure: It
is not defamation in a person having over authority, either (a) conferred by
law, or (b) arising out of a lawful contract made with each other – to pass in
good faith any censure on the conduct of that other person.
8. Bona
fide accusation:
It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person
to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with respect to the
subject matter of the accusation. For example – if A in good faith accuses Z
before a Magistrate.
9. Bona
fide imputation:
It is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another,
provided that the imputation is made –
(a)
In
good faith
(b)
For
the protection of the interest –
(i)
Of
the person making it, or
(ii)
Of
any other person, or
(c)
For
the public good
10. Conveying
Caution: It is
not defamation to convey in good faith a caution to one person, against
another, provided that such caution be intended for the good of
(i)
Of
the person making it, or
(ii)
Of
any other person, or
(iii)
For
the public good
Privileged
Communication:
It can be observed that out of above mentioned exceptions, exception no. 9 and
10 are privileged communication which made in good faith with due care and
attention upon any subject in which the party making the communication has an
interest or in reference to which has or honestly believes he has a duty for
the protection of the interest of the person to whom such communication is
made, or for the protection of the interest of the public.
It
must be noted that 1 and 4 exceptions require being true. The other exceptions
should be made in good faith.
Comments
Post a Comment