"No Intent To Harm Reputation": Kerala High Court Quashes Defamation Case Against Editor & Publisher Of Madhyamam Newspaper
Tellmy Jolly
2 July 2024 10:12 AM GMT
The Kerala High Court has quashed proceedings initiated against the editor and publisher of Madhyamam newspaper under Section 499 of the IPC on finding that the alleged news item was published without intention or knowledge to harm the reputation of the complainant.
Section 499 of the IPC defines defamation and the essential ingredients to constitute an offence of defamation. Section 500 of the IPC deals with punishment for defamation.
In this case, a news item was published in Madhyamam Daily on July 06, 2016, that allegedly caused imputation to the reputation of a lady (complainant).
Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the alleged news item was published without any intent or knowledge to cause harm to the complainant's reputation.
“…it could not be held that the editor and publisher, who published the news, published the same with a requisite intention or knowledge or reason to believe that the imputation would harm the reputation of the neighbor, in any manner and as such no offence under Section 499 of IPC, prima faice, made out against the petitioners.”
The petitioners were arrayed as accused number 16 and 17 for allegedly committing an offence punishable under Section 499 of the IPC. The 16th accused is the editor and the 17th accused is the printer and publisher of Madhyamam Daily.
Allegedly, a news item was published in Madhyamam newspaper stating that a young lady committed suicide due to financial crisis and due to mental persecution from her neighbour. The news item allegedly published disclosed the names of the neighbour and her husband. The Court was thus considering whether the petitioners published the news item with intent or knowledge to harm the reputation of the neighbour, the complainant herein.
The Counsel for the petitioners contended that the complainant had not satisfied the ingredients essential to attract an offence punishable under Section 499 of the IPC. It was argued that the specific role of the petitioners in committing the alleged offence should be made out in the complaint.
Relying upon Mohd. Abdulla Khan v Prakash K (2018), the Court stated that Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC would be attracted only when there is publication of an imputation with intention or knowledge to damage another person's reputation. The Court noted thus: “….it is held that in order to constitute offence of defamation, the ingredients are; (i) a person to make some imputation concerning any other person; (ii) such imputation must be made either (a) with intention, or (b) knowledge, or (c) having a reason to believe that such an imputation will harm the reputation of the person against whom the imputation is made. (iii) imputation could be, by (a) words, either spoken or written, or (b) by making signs, or (c) visible representations (iv) imputation could be either made or published.”
In this case, the Court observed that the news item reported about the protest made by the people in the locality for arresting the persons responsible for the suicide and the allegation raised by them for the protest.
The Court thus stated that proceedings against the petitioners were liable to be quashed for want of intention or knowledge to cause harm to the reputation of the complainant.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the petitions and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners.
Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate K Rakesh
Counsel for Respondents: Public Prosecutors Sajith Kumar K, K Shibili Naha, Nima Jacob
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 402
Case Title: O. Abdul Rahiman v State Of Kerala & Ors
Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 5375 OF 2022 & Another
