Press Should Not Publish Anything Manifestly Defamatory Against An Individual Or Institution, Can’t Exceed Limit Of Fair Comment: Delhi Court

Observing that the press should not exceed the limit of fair comment, a Delhi Court recently said that the press must not publish anything which is manifestly defamatory against any individual or institution, unless it is duly verified and there is sufficient reasons to believe that it is true and the publication will be for public good.

Emphasizing that there is an universal recognition to ethics of journalist writing regarding the caution against defamatory writing, Additional District Judge Ravinder Bedi of Karkardooma Courts said:

“General norms need to be followed. Such norms may include that - Press should not publish anything which is manifestly defamatory against any individual or institution, unless it is duly verified and there is sufficient reasons to believe that it is true and its publication will be for public good. Truth is no defence for publishing derogatory, scurrilous or defamatory material against a private citizen where no public interest is involved.”

The court added that though the press has a right to highlight cases of corruption and irregularities in public bodies as a custodian of public interest, it added that such material should be based on “irrefutable evidence and published after due inquiry and verification from the concerned source” and after obtaining the version of the person or authority being commented upon.

The court was hearing a suit moved in 2016 by Atma Ram, a former Superintendent Engineer of Delhi Development Authority against the Editor of a fortnightly newspaper “Tahirpur Times.”

Ram was aggrieved by publication of a report against him titled “Garg ka tabadala rukwane mein adhikshan abhiyanta Atma Ram ka haath”.

It was Ram’s case that the Editor falsely alleged that he had purchased various properties of agricultural land with bribed money. He thus alleged that false and defamatory imputations were levelled against him without any proof or verification of truth of facts. 

He claimed an amount of Rs.19,50,000 as general damages on the ground that the defamatory news item injured his credit and reputation in the eyes of society, friends and associates in his circle.

Observing that the tenor of the news snippet was “grossly defamatory and recklessly published against Ram without any justification”, the court said that he was entitled for damages.

“In view of my aforesaid findings, the suit of Plaintiff stands decreed in his favour against Defendant. Plaintiff is entitled for a decree of recovery of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) from the date of filing of suit till its realization. Interest @ 8% p.a. is also awarded on the said amount. Costs of the suit is also awarded,” court ordered.

Granting relief to Ram, the judge said that every person has a right to reputation and if the reputation is harmed by wrongful publication, the person has legal remedies.

“Action against defamation is a choice available to every citizen to protect his reputation against defamatory publication by Newspaper. He can either sue for damages or prosecute defaming media persons,” the court said.

Observing that the tenor of the language used in the article against Ram clearly established that the imputations were defamatory in nature, the judge said:

“Considering the evidence on record, what emerges is that the entire article, if read in totality, would indicate that its tenor is clearly to defame the Plaintiff by terming him as a ‘corrupt person’, who throughout has retained only one Department i.e. Quality Control department and who with ill gotten money obtained with corrupt means, had purchased multiple properties.”

Click Here To Read Order