What Is Defamation?
Defamation arises when a person makes or publishes any wrong or false statement or allegations or false imputation related to any person, by words either spoken or written or by signs or in any form, it is said to defame that person.
Objective
The right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) is highly respected if it is exercised in a bona fide manner and without hurting the sentiments of others.
Kinds Of Defamation
| Type | Description | Legal Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| Libel | Libel includes published, recorded, or broadcast material. | Libel is often actionable per se, meaning damages are presumed without proving actual loss. |
| Slander | Slander involves verbal, non-permanent, or gestural statements. | Slander generally requires proof of actual, “special damage” to be actionable. |
Provision Of Defamation Under BNS (Section 356)
Section 356 of BNS states that any person who makes or publishes any false imputation or allegations relating to any person, by words either spoken or written or by signs or visible representation is said to defame that person.
Illustration
A tells B that Z’s restaurant serves rotten food intending B to believe it and not go to Z’s restaurant again. Here A is guilty of Defamation.
Case
Youssoupoff v. MGM Pictures Ltd (1934)
Is a landmark English defamation case establishing that films can constitute libel. Princess Irina of Russia successfully sued MGM for portraying her as seduced or raped by Rasputin in the film “Rasputin the Mad Monk,” as the character “Princess Natasha” was identifiable as her.
Essentials Of Defamation
- The Statement Must Be Published Case :- South Indian Railway Co. V. Ramakrishna In this case a ticket checker of railway asking for the identity proof and other documents as a part of his duty is no defamation, as he has not published any defamatory statement.
- Imputation Must Be Made By Words, Signs Or Visible Representation Such an imputation or allegations must be made by words either spoken or written or sign or visible representation.
- Imputation Must Harm Reputation An imputation must be made to harm the reputation of person against whom it is made.
- Intention / Knowledge Must Be There Intention/ knowledge must be there.
Explanation Of Section 356
| Explanation No. | Provision |
|---|---|
| Explanation 1 | Defamation of a deceased person is equivalent to Defamation of a living person. |
| Explanation 2 | Imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons is Defamation. |
| Explanation 3 | Defamation by Innuendo i.e. statement that appears innocent on its face but conveys a hidden, secondary, and defamatory meaning to a specific audience with contextual knowledge. |
| Explanation 4 | Harming Reputation i.e, a reputation is only damaged if an imputation lowers a person’s character (moral/intellectual), caste, calling, or credit in the estimation of others, or implies their body is in a disgraceful state. |
Exceptions Of Defamation
There are 10 exceptions of Defamation under section 356 of BNS –
- Imputation of truth in public good requires to be made or published is not Defamation.
- Public conduct of a public servant in good faith is not Defamation.
- Conduct of any person approaching any public question in good faith is not Defamation.
- Publishing a substantially authentic report of the proceeding of any court of justice or result of any such proceeding does not amount to defamation.
- Comment on the merits of the case decided in the court or conduct of witnesses and other related to the case is not Defamation.
- Literary criticism i.e, comment on the merits of public performance is not Defamation.
- Censure passed in good faith by a person having lawful authority over another is not Defamation.
- Accusation desired in good faith to authorised person i.e, Complaint made to the authority is not Defamation.
- Imputation made in good faith by a person for the protection of his or others Interests is not Defamation.
- Cautions intended for the good of a person to whom conveyed or for the public good is not Defamation.
Objective Of The Exceptions
The exceptions strike a balance between freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and individual right to reputation.
Punishment For Defamation Under Bns Section 356
Section 356(2)
Whoever defames another shall be published with simple imprisonment of the term which may extend to 2 years with or without fine or with community service (newly added punishment).
Section 356(3)
Printing or engraving any defamatory matter shall be punishable with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years with or without fine.
Section 356(4)
Selling or offering to sell any printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter shall be punishable with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years with or without fine.
Summary Of Punishments Under Section 356
| Sub-Section | Nature Of Offence | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| Section 356(2) | Defaming another person | Simple imprisonment up to 2 years, with or without fine, or with community service |
| Section 356(3) | Printing or engraving defamatory matter | Simple imprisonment up to 2 years, with or without fine |
| Section 356(4) | Selling or offering defamatory printed/engraved substance | Simple imprisonment up to 2 years, with or without fine |
Key Landmark Cases On Defamation Under Bns
Ram Jethmalani vs. Subramanian Swamy (2006)
The Delhi High Court held Dr. Swamy liable for defaming Ram Jethmalani by stating he received money from a banned organization, emphasizing that malicious statements masquerading as public interest are actionable.
Mobashar Jawed Akbar v. Priya Ramani (2021)
A trial court acquitted journalist Priya Ramani in a criminal defamation case filed by former Union Minister M.J. Akbar. The court recognized that a woman cannot be punished for raising sexual harassment allegations, even years later, as it is protected under the right to reputation.
Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016)
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC (Now section 356 of Bns) ruling that criminal defamation is not an excessive restriction on free speech and that the right to reputation is protected under Article 21.
Amitabh Bachchan vs Star India Pvt. Ltd. (2014)
A case involving the alleged negative depiction of his name on a quiz show, where the court determined the context was fictional, highlighting the limitations of defamation suits when public interest or artistic expression is involved.
Conclusion: Balance Between Liberty And Reputation
Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita reinforces that reputation is not merely a social asset but a legally protected right. While freedom of speech remains a cornerstone of democracy, it cannot justify false and malicious imputations. The law draws a firm boundary between fair criticism and unlawful harm. In the digital age, where words travel instantly and widely, accountability becomes even more crucial. Thus, Section 356 stands as a safeguard of dignity, balancing liberty with responsibility.
