Home Opinions Why Criminal Defamation, a relic of colonial era, must go

Why Criminal Defamation, a relic of colonial era, must go

The timeless wisdom of the ancient Indian mantra Satyameva Jayate found  in Mundaka Upanishad and meaning “Truth Alone Triumphs” was adopted as the National Motto of India. But truth is often unpalatable to those in power and thus a decision was taken to retain S.499, S.500 of the Macaulay Code to control natives, also known as Indian Penal Code, 1860. These sections on Criminal Defamation enacted in year 1860, penalise even “Truth” unless it is in “Public Good” whatever that imprecise, vague, pro-British colonial/Government policy term may mean. The aim of English masters to fetter truth by “Public Good” was to completely restrict freedom of speech as anything critical of the Imperial British power.

The purpose of not following the national motto in criminal law, even after independence is simple, it is done to restrict free speech, as a person even though he may speak the truth, he may still have to face a criminal trial to prove  his truthful statement was in “Public Good” or “Good Faith”. During such a trial the person will be referred to as accused with all its resultant stigma, quite apart from the hardship and expenses of criminal trial, and thus citizens knowing the consequences, will prudently decide not to speak freely.

Comparisons are odious, yet oddly informative. It makes a stark study in contrast to observe how politicians enacted constitutional amendments in the USA and India after coming to power. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the US, states- “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”. Thus by the first amendment, the Government recognized the fundamental right of citizens to free speech and that no law shall abridge it. In India unfortunately the First Amendment to Constitution did the opposite, it severely restricted right to free speech recognized by Article 19 (1) (a) by adding Article 19(2) which retained the existing law i.e. Criminal Defamation and also gave further power to make laws to restrict Free Speech on various grounds.

- Ad - - article resumes -

Thus while American Government after coming to power gave Free Speech rights, by its first amendment, The Indian Government by its very first amendment, decided to restrict Freedom of Speech. In these first amendments lies the destiny of citizenry right to free speech.

This tendency in Indian Politicians to suppress the voice of people after assuming power was not restricted to the past, it is alive even now as was evidenced from recent circular of AAP Government to file Criminal Defamation cases, to supress voices and scare people from sharing opinion. It was stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which took a dim view of the hypocrisy of the situation where on one hand Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal took shelter under Dr Subramanian Swamy’s petition to quash Criminal Defamation law and on other hand issued a circular to file Criminal Defamation cases on others. Later AAP Government withdrew the circular, though this writer will not be surprised if in case the Supreme Court does not strike down the law, such a circular may be issued again.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in recent years has usually given a liberal interpretation to the fundamental rights of citizens. This was necessary to curb the Government’s desire to restrict peoples’ right and control them. By the first amendment which brought Art 19 (2) into the Constitution, the Government got power to restrict freedom of speech. The language of Art 19(2) had term “reasonable restrictions….on freedom of Speech”, The court considered the phrase “reasonable restrictions” which prefaces Government powers in Article 19 (2) to make laws to restrict speech to be of importance, and has interpreted it to mean that the law has to be “reasonable”. Many jurisdictions consider laws restricting basic freedoms reasonable only if they  do not unduly restrict the freedom sought to be restricted. Such “restrictions” have direct nexus with an important aim sought to be achieved and other effective alternatives are not available.

Further as Criminal Defamation has penal consequences it’s important to keep in mind that under Article 21 “Protection of life and personal liberty”- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The word ”law” used in Article 21 is of utmost importance as Supreme Court has interpreted it to mean law which is “Just, Fair and Reasonable” and not any arbitrary or capricious law.

Based on above parameters of interpretation of fundamental rights as evolved by SC S.499 has to be declared unconstitutional on various grounds amongst which some in brief are-

1) Any law in which a person can be sent to jail even though he spoke only the truth is not Just, Fair or Reasonable and violates Fundamental Rights

2) Sarcasm, Irony can also be defamation. The very purpose of sarcasm, irony is often exaggeration to highlight a point, frequently used by cartoonist, comedians and various people in public life. To consider it defamation will have “Chilling Effect” on public debate vital in a democracy.

3) S.499 criminalizes making imputations against a company or association, e.g. of doing corruption, environmental damage, malpractices etc. Thus for allegedly harming reputation of a financial/legal entity by words, a person can be sent to jail, which is violative of Art 19, 21 as recourse to financial loss of reputation for a company cannot be jail for a human being. It can only be civil damages.

Beyond this there are various other grounds including International Treaties, S 199(2) of CRPC, and arguments on interplay of fundamental rights which have been taken up in Supreme Court but due to space constraints not being set out here.

In western countries including America, laws have been passed restricting even civil suits of damages as they were being used by rich, powerful, influential individuals and corporations to stifle free speech by bringing – Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation called (SLAPP). Under this type of legal action the aim is to  frighten and silence critics due to costs of mounting a legal defence by them. This goes on until the defendant decides to abandon criticism or opposition and thus restricts their right to free speech.

In India unfortunately mere speech without any physical action still has criminal consequences and can land you in jail. In order for citizens to regain freedom including of speech for which freedom fighters fought, which the Constituent Assembly recognized, which was enshrined in the original Constitution and which was taken away by the very first amendment it is essential that the challenge mounted in the Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy Vs Union of India succeeds.

By- Ishkaran Singh Bhandari

Disclaimer- Author of this article is assisting Dr Subramanian Swamy in the Constitutional Challenge to abolish Criminal Defamation. The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. OpIndia.com is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this article. All information is provided on an as-is basis. The information, facts or opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of OpIndia.com and OpIndia.com does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.

Help Opindia Reach Every Indian. Share This Post
We need your support to survive in the media industry. Please consider paying us for the content we produce:

To know more about these payments, please click here.


Big Story

On 19th September 1965, we were in middle of the 1965 India-Pakistan war. The then Chief Minister of Gujarat, Balwant Rai Mehta, a tall Congress leader died after the civilian aircraft he was travelling with seven others was shot down by a Pakistani airforce pilot near Indo-Pak border in the Rann of Kutch.

2019 World Cup Is Here!

Catch the latest on Cricket World Cup as it unfolds, special coverage by Opindia

To Advertise on Opindia.com Click here

54 years ago on this day, Pakistan killed an Indian Chief Minister because his plane was flying ‘too close’ to Indo-Pak border

On 19th September 1965, we were in middle of the 1965 India-Pakistan war. The then Chief Minister of Gujarat, Balwant Rai Mehta, a tall Congress leader died after the civilian aircraft he was travelling with seven others was shot down by a Pakistani airforce pilot near Indo-Pak border in the Rann of Kutch.

Tulsi Gabbard punctures fake news spread by ‘journalist’ Rana Ayyub and others about Howdy Modi event

The US Presidential candidate for 2020, Tulsi Gabbard, today took to Twitter to call out the lies being spread by a shady organisation 'Organisation for minorities in India (OFMI)'

Go back to Southall slum: Hijabi woman goes on a racist rant at an Indian co-passenger in a over-crowded London bound bus

A Hijabi woman is seen launching a racist attack on an Indian co-passenger travelling in a crowded 195 bus from Romney Highway in Brentford, West London

Muslim student in Pakistan confesses he cooked up blasphemy charges against Hindu principal which led to violence on Hindus

Muslim mob unleashed violence against Hindu's in Ghotki, Pakistan, following the Muslim students false complaint against his Hindu principal

Sun TV fined Rs 2.5 lakh for telecasting a violent rape sequence in its prime time serial Kalyana Veedu

Sun TV and producers, Thiru Pictures in the hearing which was held last month, defended the serial and argued that they had taken precautions to make sure that the dialogues were not vulgar and obscene.

Tamil Nadu police detains a Muslim man loitering around a dargah disguised as a Hindu saint

Last month Tamil Nadu was put on high alert following intel that members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba had infiltrated into the state

While talking about Muslims in Jammu, Karan Thapar diminishes massacre of Hindus and Sikhs in Jammu and the KP exodus

Karan Thapar in his article "We cannot be selective about the past in Jammu & Kashmir" in Hindustan Times dated 15th Sept 2019, gives a call to morality, intellectual honesty and being conscious to multiple peoples and their identities.

E-cigarettes: What are they, why they were banned, and why it is difficult to ban traditional cigarettes

Ban on e-cigarette is a welcome decision, but government will have a tough time explaining not banning cigarettes

16 Mosques and a Gurudwara to be used as ‘pickup points’ to gather anti-Modi protestors for ‘Howdy, Modi’ event in Houston

Kashmiri and Khalistani Separatist messages were seen during the rehearsal of the protests

Digital Marketing company that used to pay Professional Congress troll says he won’t be assigning any ‘work’ to the ‘low-level influencer’

‘Professional Congress’ member, Andria D’souza, found herself in an embarrassing situation after it was revealed that she charges Rs 500 for tweeting promotional tweets.
Subscribe to Day's Top Stories
[newsletter_form type="minimal"]
- Advertisment -

Latest articles

Connect with us

182,861FansLike
180,913FollowersFollow
97,800SubscribersSubscribe
Help Opindia Reach Every Indian. Share This Post