Concept of Defamation under Law of Torts

Introduction

Defamation in the Law of Torts refers to harming a person’s reputation through false statements. According to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) 1860, defamation occurs when someone makes or publishes a false statement about another person with the intent to harm their reputation, or knowing that such a statement could harm their reputation.

Defamation under the Law of Torts is categorized into two types: Libel and Slander.

Types of Defamation

            1. Libel: This involves defamatory statements in a written or permanent form, such as in print or online publications. To file a libel case, two conditions must be met:
            The defendant published a defamatory statement about the plaintiff.
Others have been exposed to the defamatory statement.

            In cases of libel, no further proof is needed once the statement is published, as the law assumes that a written defamatory statement will continue to harm the plaintiff as long as it remains in public.
        

            2. Slander: Slander refers to defamatory statements made in spoken form. It is harder to prove than libel because there is usually no tangible proof. Slander can be divided into two categories: Slander and Slander Per Se.
            Slander: Requires the plaintiff to prove that the defamatory statement was communicated to at least one other person and caused them specific damage, such as loss of customers or income.
Slander Per Se: Does not require proof of specific damage. This applies when the statement inherently harms the plaintiff’s reputation, such as allegations of criminal conduct, claims of a contagious disease, or statements damaging the plaintiff’s business or profession.

        

Essentials of Defamation under Law of Torts

            1. The Statement Must Be Defamatory: The statement should lower the plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of society or make others avoid them.
        

Case Law: In Ram Jethmalani v. Subramanian Swamy, the court found that Dr. Swamy’s statements accusing the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu of knowing about the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi were defamatory, as they significantly damaged the plaintiff's reputation.

            2. The Statement Must Refer to the Plaintiff: The plaintiff must show that the statement was about them, either directly or by reasonable inference. If the statement cannot be reasonably linked to the plaintiff, the defendant is not liable.
        

Case Law: In Newstead v. London Express Newspaper Ltd., the court held the defendant liable when an article about a bigamy conviction mistakenly defamed another person with the same name who lived in the same area.

            3. The Statement Must Be Published: The defamatory statement must be communicated to someone other than the plaintiff or defendant. If no one else knows about the statement, there is no defamation.
        

Case Law: In Mahendra Ram v. Harnandan Prasad, the defendant was held liable for defamation after sending a defamatory letter in Urdu, knowing the plaintiff couldn’t read Urdu and would have to ask someone else to read it.

Defenses against Defamation under Law of Torts

            1. Justification of Truth: In civil cases, proving that the statement is true is a valid defense. In criminal cases, truth alone is not a defense unless it is also in the public interest.
        

            2. Fair Comment: A comment made as an opinion rather than a statement of fact, without malice, and on a matter of public interest is protected.
        

            3. Privilege: Certain occasions are legally recognized as privileged, where freedom of speech outweighs the plaintiff’s right to reputation. Privilege is divided into two types:
            Absolute Privilege: No action can be taken for defamatory statements made in certain contexts, even if they are false or malicious. This applies to parliamentary proceedings, judicial proceedings, and state communications.
Qualified Privilege: Statements made without malice on a privileged occasion are protected. The defendant must prove that the statement was made in good faith and on a privileged occasion.

        

Comment

Nothing for now