Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Recently, a horde of defamation cases have filed against various people for alleged misuse of their names or damage to their reputation. The Supreme Court held in the Subramaniam Swamy v Union of India case held that a person’s freedom of speech and expression is not an absolute right and should be balanced by a right not to harm another’s reputation.
On January 8th, the Supreme Court has redeemed itself in a way by proclaiming that not all cases of journalistic misreporting can amount to defamation. In this particular case, Fatima Amanullah, the daughter of a former civil servant in Bihar and a former minister, Praveen Amanullah have filed a case against the past editor-in-chief of CNN-IBN , Rajdeep Sardesai and Raghav Bahl, the former MD of network 18 claiming that their news channel has defamed them in a previous story covered by them.
In response to the Judicial 1st class magistrate’s order of October 29, 2011 issuing a summons against the respondents, Sardesai and Bahl challenged it by arguing that there was no provision for vicarious liability under defamation and the petition of the claimants is against the specific bar under section 196(2) of CrPC. The petitioners made reference to the IBN-7 Hindi news report of July 18, 2011 which allegedly tarnished the names of Fatima and her family with regard to the scam in the allotment of land by Bihar Industrial area development authority for a food processing unit they wanted to establish.
Holding that there is no space for vicarious liability under the IPC unless specifically provided for and the cognizance of conspiracy to defame under section 120B cannot be taken without the approval of state government or the judicial magistrate, the High court held against the claimants. The Supreme Court agreeing with the reasoning and decision of HC has denied the appeal.
86540
103860
630
114
59824