Defamation in Criminal Law

Defamation is the act of disseminating false information about someone to damage that person's reputation in the eyes of the public. Any intentional, knowing, and purposeful statement that is false, improper, and meant to damage someone's reputation is considered defamation.. A person's reputation is regarded as his property, and any harm to it is illegal. It might be spoken or written. Libel refers to defamation that is written, printed, typed, or depicted in graphics; slander refers to defamation that is spoken. Defamation is covered under the Legal studies.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. History of Defamation
2. Defamation Law in India
3. Essential Ingredients of Defamation
4. Types of Defamation
5. Exceptions for Defamation
6. Punishment for Defamation
7. Case Laws on Defamation
8. Conclusion

History of Defamation

The history of defamation can be found in both German and Roman law. In Roman law, abusive chants were punishable by death. In early English and German law, insults were punished by having the tongue cut out. In England, only accusations of crime, social disease, or casting doubt on one's professional ability constituted slander in the late 18th century. The Slander of Women Act made the imputation of unchastity illegal. French defamation laws were extremely harsh. In newspapers, it was highly penalized to retract libellous content. In Italy, defamation is criminally punishable and truth rarely serves as an excuse for defection.

Defamation Law in India

Several freedoms are granted to the citizens by Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. Nonetheless, the reasonable exemption to the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1) (a) has been enforced by Article 19(2). Defamation, inciting an infraction, and contempt of court are a few examples of exclusions.

It is illegal to defame someone in both civil and criminal contexts. The Law of Torts in civil law punishes defamation by requiring the claimant to receive damages as compensation. Defamation is a non-cognizable, compoundable, and bailable offence under the criminal code. Therefore, a police officer can only arrest with a magistrate's arrest warrant. According to the Indian Penal Code, the offence carries a fine, a simple jail sentence of up to two years, or both.

Sections 499, 500, 501, and 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 contain the provisions governing the offence of defamation. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was created in 1860 and regulated several criminal offences, including defamation.

Essential Ingredients of Defamation

Statement Must be Defamatory in Nature

The comment must be defamatory, or it must tend to damage the plaintiff's reputation, for it to qualify as a defamatory crime. The litmus test for whether or not a comment constitutes defamation will be based on the opinions of the most rational members of society. Furthermore, even if the speech incited feelings of anger, disdain, or dislike, it is not a defence that can be used against someone.

In the case of Ram Jethmalani v. Subramaniyam Swami

In this case, The court determined that Dr Swamy was responsible for defaming Mr Jethmalani by claiming that he had accepted funding from an illegal organization to defend the then-chief minister of Tamil Nadu in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.

Statement Must Refer to the Plaintiff

In a defamation lawsuit, the plaintiff must establish that the comment the defendant made about him was directed against him; it will not matter if the defendant had no intention of defaming the plaintiff. The defendant shall be held accountable if the person to whom the statement was published could reasonably assume that the comment was directed at him.

In the case of, T.V. Ramasubha Iyer v. A.M.A Mohindeen

In this case, the defendants were found accountable by the court for releasing a statement they did not intend to discredit. The announcement said that someone who was shipping Agarbathis products to Ceylon had been arrested for smuggling. The plaintiff, who ran a similar company, also experienced serious damage to his reputation as a result of this statement.

Such Statement Must be Published

Publishing a message that defames someone other than the intended recipient is the most important step in making someone answerable for defamation. A slander action cannot be brought without this. However, if a letter meant for the plaintiff is misunderstood by someone else, the defendant may still be held liable. However, if the plaintiff gets a letter that is likely to be seen by someone else that is defamatory, then publication will be legally published.

In the case of, Mahendra Ram v. Harnandan Prasad

In this case, The defendant was found accountable for sending the plaintiff a defamatory letter written in Urdu even though the defendant knew the plaintiff did not speak the language and that someone else would probably read the message.

You may also read

• Remedies against defamation and defences against defamation

Types of Defamation

Libel

For an action to be classified as libel, the evidence in question must be proven to be false, defamatory, made public, or in writing. The allegedly defamatory statement must also be made concerning the plaintiff, either directly or indirectly, and must also establish a reasonable connection between the statement and the individual.

It is also not necessary to name the defendant, even when their intention is not to be stated explicitly. However, defamation cannot be directed towards a deceased person or a group of persons, such as doctors. As a result, if the live person's reputation is harmed by the defamation, they may be sued for defamation under these conditions.

Slander

In many cases, slander might also be quite similar to libel. When you shout insulting things at your clerk, and she types them on a letterhead, you are making a statement that you want a third party to hear. Therefore, in this case, the transmission method is considered transitory.

Exceptions for Defamation

First Exception- Attribution of Truth Made for Public Good

If an imputation is made or published for the advantage of the public, it is not considered defamation to suggest anything accurate about another person. Whether or not it is in the public interest, is a factual matter. The accused must prove that the statement he made was true in full, not just in part, to be eligible for this exception. An inquiry into whether the publication meant to provide any advantage to the whole or portion of the public is necessary to prove whether or not the statement was made for the public good.

Second Exception- Conduct of Public Servants

It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion concerning the behaviour of a public servant while carrying out his official duties or regarding his character, only to the extent that such behaviour reflects his character. As long as their remarks are not motivated by hatred, everyone has the freedom to express their opinions about the activities of public authorities that have an impact on them as citizens of the nation. For a comment to be considered fair-

• It ought to be grounded in actual events.

• It should not be assumed that the person whose behaviour or output is being criticized has corrupt or dishonest motivations unless the evidence supports such an assumption.

• It must be a truthful and impartial assessment of the author's actual viewpoint.

• There must be a common benefit.

Third Exception- Respecting the Conduct of Any Person Relating to Public Questions

It is not defamatory to voice opinions in good faith about the behaviour of any individual concerning any public matter, and to respect that person's character solely to the degree that that behaviour reveals it. Publicists who engage in politics or other issues impacting the public may face criticism despite their good intentions.

Fourth Exception- Publications of Reports of Procedures of Courts

It is not defamatory to publish a report that is truthful of the procedures of a Court of Justice or the outcome of any such proceedings. The publication of a fair and accurate account of proceedings before a properly formed judiciary panel in an open court setting is protected by the privilege against malicious publication.

Fifth Exception- Opinion on any Civil or Criminal Cases Decided by the Court

Forming an honest assessment of the merits of any civil or criminal case decided by a court of justice, or the behaviour of any individual involved in the case as a witness, agent, or party, or the nature of that individual, to the extent that it is evident in that behaviour, and no more is not considered defamation. Public discussion can be allowed regarding the court's ruling, the jury's conclusion, and the behaviour of the parties and witnesses. Critique, however, ought to be voiced fairly and in good faith.

Sixth Exception- Merits on Performance of Public

It is not defamatory to voice opinions in good faith about the merits of a performance that its creator has submitted for public review or about the creator's character as it is demonstrated in that performance and no more.

This exception is intended to let the general public evaluate the public performance that is the subject of the review. It is appropriate to express concerns over any type of public performance, provided that the criticism is given equitably and with good intentions. According to this exception, good faith requires reasonable care and attention rather than logical infallibility.

Seventh Exception- Censure Passed by a Person having Lawful Authority over Another in Good Faith

Whether that power is derived from a legal agreement or another source, it is not defamatory for someone in a position of authority to criticize another person's actions in good faith when it comes to matters of that lawful authority.

This exception permits the person whose authority others have been placed under either voluntarily or per the law to legitimately criticize others who have been placed under his supervision, so long as that authority is relevant to the matter at hand. On the other hand, abuse of this privilege will be considered a crime.

Eighth Exception- Accusition to an Authorised Person in Good Faith

Making a sincere accusation against someone to a person with authorized jurisdiction over them over the charge's subject matter is not considered defamation. Moreover, in a criminal defamation case, even statements made in a plant are not completely protected; to establish a defence under this exception, the accused must show that the person filing the complaint had legal authority over the individual facing charges under the specific facts.

Last Exception- Imputations to Protect His or Other’s Interest

It is not deemed defamatory to denigrate the character of another where the accusation is made with good intentions to safeguard one's interests, the interests of others, or the greater good. Because of this exception, the party to whom the information is revealed has a stake in keeping the accuser safe. Apart from the veracity of the imputation maker, there must be a shared interest between the recipient and the imputation maker for the communication to be valid.

While the first exemption only applies to sincere imputation for the benefit of the public, this exception covers any imputation undertaken in good faith. The defendant needs to demonstrate that he acted in good faith.

Punishment for Defamation

Section 500 IPC

While the first exemption only applies to sincere imputation for the benefit of the public, this exception covers any imputation undertaken in good faith. The defendant needs to demonstrate that he acted in good faith.

Section 501 IPC

Section 501 of the Indian Penal Code forbids the publication of defamatory material. It says that anyone who prints or engraves something defamatory would harm that person's reputation and bring shame and embarrassment to their character, knowing or having reason to suspect that such a thing is defamatory. The maximum penalty allowed under this clause is two years in prison, a fine, or both.

Section 502 IPC

Section 502 of the Indian Penal Code penalizes anyone who sells or plans to sell any printed item that he knows or has reasonable suspicion contains defamatory material. There will be a two-year maximum sentence for imprisonment or a fine. Both are applicable in some situations.

Case Laws on Defamation

In the case of, B.R.K Murthy v. State of AP

In this case, The newspaper's editor made disparaging remarks that included falsehoods without giving them enough thought or making an effort to confirm them before publishing them, and she did not do so in a sincere effort to do so. The accused was declared guilty by the court because the charges made against him under Sections 500, 501, and 502 of the IPC and Section 34 of the IPC, 1860 were true.

In the case of, Shubhash K. Shah v. K Shankar Bhat

In this case, The petitioner is a Class I officer from a well-known business family. The respondent, a weekly editor, published a piece in his newspaper that contained false and defamatory charges about him. The editor did not apologize until after he was convinced. The punishment was then enhanced from a fine to a strict two-month jail sentence and a fine of Rs. 2,000.

Conclusion

The Constitution of India provides the Right to Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(A) to the citizens of the country. The Right given by the Constitution of India to express freely comes with a set of reasonable restrictions, one of the restrictions happens to be defamation. This means publishing derogatory statements against a person which is not true and such statements harm the reputation of the person. Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with the offence of defamation and section 500, 501 and 502 of the IPC provides the punishment for defamation.