Preview

Defamation (India)

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
699 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Defamation (India)
DEFAMATION. INTRODUCTION: Defamation is something spoken or in print, which is intended to harm a person’s reputation. It is basically a false statement, or an offensive visual representation which might defame someone or prove harmful to one’s public image and reputation. It not only implies to individuals, but also to business, products, group, government, religion or nation. It is an offence punishable by law. Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code criminalises defamation. It has four sections (section 499-502) which define elaborately what constitutes defamation and what the consecutive punishments are. TYPES: Defamation is of two kinds, namely : * Slander – Defamation in a transitory form, mainly speech. (verbal). * Libel – Defamation in print. (Written, pictures etc). Both the offences are punishable under the same section of IPC.

There are however, some defences in defamation.

* Truth published for public interest is the best defence. * Any expression in good faith on the conduct or character of a public servant on a public question. * Publication of a substantially true report. * It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with respect to the subject matter of accusation. * It is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another person, provided it is made in good faith by person for protection of his or other’s interests.

CASE STUDY:

Lalit Modi faces Twitter defamation charges from former New Zealand cricketer Chris Cairns.

Lalit Modi, then the IPL commissioner, tweeted in January 2010 that Chris Cairns, the former New Zealand allrounder, had been removed from the forthcoming IPL auction list because of his involvement with

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    WIRETIME has committed an intentional business related tort known as Defamation. In this case all four elements of defamation are present. A defamatory statement was made, it was spread to a third party, the statement was very definite to one company, and it caused damages to BUGusa business.…

    • 708 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Gng4170 Lecture Notes

    • 4235 Words
    • 17 Pages

    o Defamation – An intentional tort. The reputation of the victim is damaged publicly by untrue statements made by the tort-feezer.…

    • 4235 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Bugusa, Inc., Worksheet

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Communicated to a third party. By advertising the disparaging statement, WIRETIME communicated to a third party, the public, thus satisfying the third condition of trade libel.…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plaintiff complains that Defendant Popp falsely represented “the potential for sales from Popp’s Charlotte office,” “the quality of yarn produced by Clemson,” and “the availability of customers for Clemson Yarn.” Each of these categories, however, necessarily implies a statement of opinion, including, no doubt, a certain amount of puffery. Statements of opinion, in large part because they can be neither true nor false, are not actionable as fraudulent.…

    • 281 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bugusa Case Study

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages

    A Tort was committed by WIRETIME, Inc. which means “a civil wrong where on party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, S.P., 2011) The statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. will potentially harm Bugusa, Inc. reputation. A statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. accusing Bugusa, Inc. products were low quality and did not work past a months’ time. This type of statement is a defamatory “A false and defamatory…

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    b) If the person is a public official or figure a plantiff seeking damages for distress must prove actual malice. Actual malice includes knowledge that the printed statements are false or circumstances showing a reckless disregard for whether they are true or not. If the plaintiff is not a public figure there is liability without malice.…

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Bugusa Worksheet

    • 459 Words
    • 3 Pages

    was very particular to one organization, and it put a negative frame of mind to BUGusa’s…

    • 459 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Eposito Case

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages

    According to the case, defamation was not found because “Defendants ' conduct, although not actionable as defamation by reason of being an expression of opinion, may nonetheless be the subject of an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress under the unique factual circumstances in this case, where the aggrieved party is a private individual rather than a "public figure", where the nature of the communications made by defendants involved a matter of virtually no "public interest", where there is an inference that defendants ' conduct…

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Flynt V Falwell Summary

    • 891 Words
    • 4 Pages

    v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), ruled that a public figure may hold a speaker liable for the damage to reputation caused by publication of a defamatory falsehood, but only if the statement was made "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." This ad parody did not display actual malice, that is Hustler did not publish false facts in order to intentionally harm this man, also that no reasonable person could believe the facts of the ad to be true. Although the ad may have been distasteful and outrageous, according to the respondent, "Outrageousness" in the area of political and social discourse has an inherent subjectiveness about it which would allow a jury to impose liability on the basis of the jurors' tastes or views, or perhaps on the basis of their dislike of a particular expression. An "outrageousness" standard thus runs afoul of our longstanding refusal to allow damages to be awarded because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience. See NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 910 (1982) ("Speech does not lose its protected character . . . simply because it may embarrass others or coerce them into action"). Also, as stated in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726…

    • 891 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Esposito v. SFX

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages

    4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)…

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)…

    • 385 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato's Apology

    • 4230 Words
    • 17 Pages

    what do the slanderers say? They shall be my prosecutors, and I will sum up their words in…

    • 4230 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    chapter 1 assignment

    • 564 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The main difference between libel and slander is how it’s imposed. Libel is a written or recorded statement of facts about someone or business while slander is a spoken defamation of a person ro a business. (Clarkson, Miller, Cross, 2012, p. 119). A libel case deals with false statements that caused harm or damage such as destroying reputation and causing humiliation for the plaintiff. On the other hand slander case involves plaintiff claiming false or misleading statement that was verbally expressed about the plaintiff and it resulted in an economic or monetary loss for the plaintiff.…

    • 564 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Deamation Lawsuit Summary

    • 348 Words
    • 2 Pages

    To win a defamation lawsuit there are four elements that the plaintiff must prove; Defamation which are factual statements that are likely to harm someone’s reputation. The police officers argued that Mosby made statements that they deliberately ignored Grey’s injuries and cries for help. They stated in their lawsuit that this statement is defamatory because “they exposed Plaintiffs to public scorn, hatred and contempt, and thereby discouraging others in the community from having a favourable opinion of, or association with, Plaintiffs”. The second element is Falsity, the statements made must be false. Plaintiffs argue that Mosby did not have actual evidence to support her statement. The third element is Communicated, the statement made communicated…

    • 348 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    what is crime

    • 929 Words
    • 4 Pages

    of a criminal case. If I slander somebody, I might be dragged into court, and I might have…

    • 929 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays