Detailed Presentation on Defamation Law in India Made By: Edited By: Ayush Patria, Sangam University, Bhilwara Follow us on Instagram: @law_laboratory Website: www.lawlaboratory.in

1. DEFAMATION LAW

2. WHAT IS DEFAMATION?
• Section 499: Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or
by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation
concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to
believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is
said, except in the cases, hereinafter expected, to defame that person.

3. • The Constitution of India has provided fundamental right of
freedom of speech and expression. But this right is not absolute
and subject to certain limitations. An individual may speak or
express his ideas but it should not cause defamation of another.

4. BASIC ELEMENT OF DEFAMATION
• FIRST, the presence of defamatory content is required. Defamatory
content is defined as a content which can harm the reputation of another
by exposing one person to hatred, contempt or ridicule. However, the test
for such content is the layman test where meaning of the content is
considered to be what a prudently man will comprehend it to be.

5. • SECOND, the claimant should be identified in the defamatory
statement. The content must be clearly addressing a particular person
or a small group for it to be defamation.
General statements Like “All lawyers are thieves or all politicians are
corrupt” are too wide a classification Therefore, such statements are
not defamation.

6. • THIRD, there must be a publicizing of the defamatory statement
in either oral or written form. Unless the content is published –
made available to somebody other than the claimant, there can be
no defamation.

7. EXPLANATION TO SECTION 499 OF IPC
• Explanation 1: It may result to defamation to ascribe anything to
deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that
person if living, and is intended to be distressing to the feelings of
his family or other near relatives.

8. • Explanation 2: It may amount to defamation to make an ascription
concerning a company or an association or collective group of
people as such.
• Explanation 3: An imputation in the form of an substitute or
expressed ironically, may amount to defamation.

9. • Explanation 4: No accusation is said to hurt a person’s reputation,
unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others,
degrades the reputation of that person, or character of that person in
respect of his caste or of his calling, or causes it to be believed that the
body of that person is in hateful state, or in a state generally considered
as disgraceful.

10. KINDS OF DEFAMATION
LIBEL SLANDER

11. • Libel is publication of a false and defamatory statement in some
permanent form tending to harm the reputation of another person
without lawful justification or excuse. Examples: writing , picture,
printing, online publication, cartoons etc.
LIBEL

12. SLANDER
• Slander is false or defamatory, verbal or oral statement in some
transitory form, tending to harm the reputation of another without
lawful justification or excuse. Example: words uttered, explanation
of something , communication , on radio television etc.

13. • False statement
• Publication
• Publication by defendant
• The statement must refer to plaintiff
• Defamatory statement
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF DEFAMATION

14. • The statement must be false.
• If the statement is not false or actual narration; it will not amount to
defamation. Here statement includes written and oral statement.
• CASE : Narayana Ayyar vs. G. Veerappa Pillai
• CASE : Madhab Chandra Ghose and Ors. vs. Nirod Chandra Ghose.
FALSE STATEMENT

15. PUBLICATION
• Publication of the statement is necessary for defamation.
• Publication is acknowledge in technical sense in relation to defamation.
It means the content of the defamatory statement are conveyed to any third
person else other than the plaintiff.
• If defendant has communicated defamatory statement only to the
plaintiff and to no one else then, it shall not amount to defamation.

16. • If the defamatory letter is send to the plaintiff and is likely to be
read by someone else, this will amount to publication.
• CASE : Pullman vs. Hill (1891) QB 524 – dictating a letter one’s
typist is enough publication.
• CASE : Mahendra Ram vs. Harnandan Prasad AIR 1958 Pat 445 –
defamatory letter in Urdu – read by third person – held no libel.

17. • The statement must be published by the defendant.
• Where plaintiff himself publishes statement; no action lies.
• Where publishers are jointly and severally liable; all can be sued. For
example- writer, publisher and editor of newspaper.
• CASE: Rustom K. Karanjia And Anr. vs. Krishnaraj M.D. Thackersey.
PUBLICATION BY DEFENDANT

18. • “In an action for libel, the question is not who was meant but rather who
was hit”.
• In an action for defamation, the statement alleged must refer to the
plaintiff.
• It is not necessary to show that, the defendant intended to refer the
plaintiff.
STATEMENT MUST REFER TO PLAINTIFF

19. • To get success, the plaintiff has to prove.
• CASE : Hulton Co. vs. Jones (1990) AC 20 – publication of a
fictional article on ethics in Sunday chronicle in the name of a
person Artemus Jones, a churchwarden at Pekham - a barrister of
same name bought an action-held libel.

20. • Only defamatory statement amounts to defamation.
• A statement is defamatory, if it let down the plaintiff‘s evaluation,
in prudent man’s aspect or it is a statement which if known to a
reasonable person shall cause him to be shun and avoided by the
persons in the society.
DEFAMATORY STATEMENT

21. • CASE : DP Choudhury vs. Manjulata AIR 1997 Raj –
running away in the name of night classes - published in
Dainik Novjyoti –held defamation and Rs. One lakh awarded
as damages.

22. • Justification
• Contextual Truth
• Absolute privilege
• Qualified privilege
• Honest opinion
DEFENSE TO DEFAMATION

23. • This defense is used when the statement that is made is true. For
example – someone tells a group of people that another person had
been convicted of theft. If, however, the person had been charged, but
not declared guilty, then it would not be true. The court assumes that
the statement is false. The defense has to prove the contrary.
JUSTIFICATION

24. The defendant may also contend that the statement was made in
the public interest.
• For example – announcing that a charity director had been
dealing dishonestly with the funds.

25. • It applies when the defendant can prove that, in addition to the
material complained by the plaintiff, the publication contains one
or more statements that are substantially true.
CONTEXTUAL TRUTH

26. • For Example: if a newspaper publishes an article that is
considerably true, but states amongst other matters that Bill Smith
has been convicted of assault when in fact he has been find guilty
of armed robbery it is unlikely to harm Bill Smith’s reputation.

27. PRIVILEGE
• 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 states to
politicians who can say what they like in the houses of parliament
and not be sued for defamation.

28. • QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE - Situations where this defense may
be used contain 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 is not protected by this defense.

29. It applies if the defendant can show that :
• The substance was an expression of opinion rather than a
statement of fact.
• That the belief relates to a matter of public interest.
HONEST OPINION

30. • That the opinion is based on a proper material .
• Grave 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.

31. FREEDOM OF SPEECH V. CRIMINAL DEFAMATION
• Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution guarantees each citizen of India the
freedom of free speech and expression.
• Article 19 (2) limits the freedom of speech with reasonable restrictions.
• Every citizen has a right to freedom of speech and expression except this
freedom goes against the following :

32. a. The sovereignty and integrity of India.
b. Security of the state.
c. Friendly relations with the foreign states.
d.Public order, decency and morality.
e. Or is in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to
an offense.

33. • The right to free speech may be jeopardized by the fact that person
could be sued for defamation.
• It is usually held that defamation must imitate to the implication of
freedom, even if conformity means that the plaintiffs experience
superior difficulty in protecting their reputation.
PROBLEMS WITH DEFAMATION LAW

34. Never try to destroy someone's life with a lie when yours could
be destroyed by the truth.
CONCLUSION