Skip to main content

Defamation

                               Defamation

Defamation is that offence which is charged on people who try to or tend to create wrong opinion or image of any individual in the eyes of the public. It is a procedure which keeps the check and balance on the people who tend to harm the reputation of other people by keeping an eye on their Right to freedom of Speech and Expression as inculcated in Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

To make sure that this does not happen, that is the reputation and image of the individual is not harmed, there are provisions under the Section 499 and Section 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which talks about the defamation and the punishment awarded in this offence.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

 To mention the actual definition, defamation is charged on peoples who by spoken words or written words, signs or visible gestures creates or publishes any imputation on any person with an intention to harm the reputation of that person and the person who makes such an imputation should have the knowledge or a reason to believe that whatever he or she is saying will ruin the reputation of the other person. Also, some things are important which should be established before charging for the offence of defamation:

  1. It is necessary that the words spoken or written or anything in any matter has the capacity to harm the reputation of the person in any third person’s eyes apart from the person talked about ant the person who is saying. 

  2. For a person to be sued for defamation, the publication should be established that is the words spoken or written must have been read or heard or seen the written, spoken, gestured or pictured defamatory words.  There will be no defamation if the person only thought about that in his own mind. Therefore, it should be conveyed to the third person in true sense. There are various forms of publication which can take place. They are:

  1. Direct communication- If the person saying bad words or anything which have the capacity to harm the reputation of the person, is directly conveyed to that person only, then it will not constitute as defamation. The reason behind this no one heard. It was direct communication between the person talked about and the person saying it. Except them, no one heard and no reputation was ruined.

  2. By Repetition- To sue for the act of defamation, there is a limited time which the person can take and according to the Limitation Act, 1968 this period is for 1 year and it will renew every time when it will be published. Also, the defamation will be charged every time, the publication takes place.

  1. Printed matters- The publication also takes place when it is printed. It is said that whoever prints information which can ruin an individual’s reputation or defamatory in nature will be awarded punishment. According to the Section 501 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, that person will be sent to jail for maximum of 2 years or fine or both is provided. And according to Section 502, the person who is involved in circulating that defamatory matter who has the reason to believe that the matter which he or she is carrying will ruin someone’s reputation will also be charged with the offence of defamation and the punishment awarded will be imprisonment which can extend to two years or could be fine. In some cases, both will be done.

However, there are exceptions also which is included in the Section in case the person doing it has not done it intentionally and whatever has happened was the accident. But still, the punishment is mentioned in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 if someone ever tries to harm the reputation of the other person because the reputation is something which the individual builds his own life and no one has the right to just come and ruin it.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more