Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

A division bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta quashed a complaint of defamation against a newspaper under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

• The Supreme Court quashed the complaint in the case of Sanjay Upadhya v. Anand Dubey.

What is the Background of Sanjay Upadhya v. Anand Dubey Case?

• The accused (appellant), facing prosecution under Section 500 of IPC lodged by the complainant, filed an instant appeal.
• Allegedly, the appellant, owner of 'Sunday Blast' newspaper, published a defamatory article without verifying facts.
• Despite a complaint dismissed by the Magistrate in 2017, a revision procedure reversed the decision in 2018.
• The appellant's plea to the High Court was dismissed in 2020.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The SC held that “As a consequence, all proceedings sought to be taken against the accused appellant in pursuance of the complaint filed by the respondent-complainant under Section 500 of the IPC are also quashed”.
• SC based its decision on the ground that the initial dismissal was well-grounded, considering freedom of speech.
• The publication was in good faith, exercising constitutional rights.
• Thus, the lower court's decision remained justified, warranting no further interference.

What is the Concept and Execptions of a Defamation Charge?

• Concept:
  • In the IPC, Sections 499 and 500 deal with defamation. Defamation is the act of making a statement that harms the reputation of an individual or entity.
  • Section 500 of IPC provides punishment for defamation. It states that whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
  • However, there are certain exceptions to defamation under Indian law, outlined in Section 499 of the IPC.
  • These exceptions provide defenses for individuals accused of defamation under certain circumstances.
• Exceptions:
  • Truth:
    • A statement is not considered defamatory if it is true and can be justified with evidence.
    • Truth is a valid defense against defamation charges.
  • Public Good:
    • Statements made in the interest of public good are not considered defamatory.
    • If a statement is made with the intention of public welfare or in the public interest, it may not be deemed defamatory.
  • Opinion:
    • Expressions of opinion, as opposed to assertions of fact, are generally not considered defamatory.
    • However, if an opinion is presented as a statement of fact and causes harm to someone's reputation, it may still be actionable.
  • Fair Comment:
    • Fair comments on matters of public interest are not considered defamatory.
    • This exception allows individuals to express their opinions or criticisms on matters of public concern without facing defamation charges, as long as the comments are fair and made in good faith.
  • Privilege:
    • Statements made under certain privileges recognized by law are exempt from defamation claims.
    • For example, statements made in the course of judicial proceedings, legislative debates, or by government officials in the discharge of their duties may be protected from defamation claims.
• Position of Defamation in Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS):
  • Section 356 of BNS provides the definition and punishment for the offence of defamation.