Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > Concept of Reputation
In India, defamation is both a civil and criminal offence. The remedy for civil defamation is covered under the Law of Torts. In a civil defamation case, a person who is defamed can move either high court or subordinate courts and seek damages in the form of monetary compensation from the accused. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides an opportunity for the defamed person to file a criminal case against the accused. Under sections 499 and 500 of the IPC, a person guilty of criminal defamation can be sent for imprisonment for a term which may extend two years or fine, or both. In this article, we shall discuss the concept of reputation.
Concept of Reputation:
Every man is entitled to have his reputation. Jurist Blackstones has added to this proposition and indited that “Every man is entitled to have his reputation preserved inviolate”.
A man’s reputation is his property. Depending upon perception of that man, reputation is more valuable to him than any other property. Reputation is the state of being held in high esteem and honor or the general estimation that the public has for a person. Reputation can also be defined to be good name, the credit, honour or character which is derived from a favourable public opinion or esteem, and character by report. Reputation depends on opinion, and opinion is the main basis of communication of thoughts and Information amongst humans. In simpler words, reputation is nothing but enjoyment of good opinion on the part of others. So, the right to have reputation involves right to have reputation inviolate or intact.
In Dr. Mehmood Nayyar Azam vs State Of Chhattisgarh, AIR 2012 SC 2573 case, the Court observed: “Right to reputation is a facet of right to life of a citizen under the Article 21 of the Constitution. Reputation is not only the salt of life but also the purest treasure and the most precious perfume of life. It extremely delicate and a cherished value this side of the grave. It is a revenue generator for the present as well as for the prosperity”.
Any intentional violation of this right can be termed as an offence of “defamation”. Defamation is civil as well as criminal wrong. Likewise, the codified criminal law on the subject, the civil law of defamation is not codified. The criminal law on the topic is contained in Sections 499 to 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. However, defamation as a Civil Wrong is covered under the Law of Torts. It is purely based on precedential developments, i.e. through decisions pronounced by Courts. Rules and principles of liability that are applied by our courts are mostly those borrowed from common law.
Distinguishing between Character and Reputation:
Generally “character” and “reputation” are used synonymously, there is a difference between the two.
| Character | Reputation |
| Character is the distinctive qualities of an individual. | Reputation is the general opinion of others of a person. |
| Character takes years to build | Reputation is built in a very short period. |
| Character is who you are (internal). | Reputation is how the society sees you (external). |
| Character is built through the individual effort. | Reputation is built by others. |
Criminal Defamation:
The word defamation is derived from Latin word ‘Diffamare’, that it means ‘Spreading evil report about someone’.
In Parmiter v. Coupland, [1840] 6 M & W 105 case, Parke B. defined Defamation as “A publication, without justification or lawful excuse, which is calculated to injure the reputation of another, by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule”
Faulks Committee in England in 1975 defined defamation as: ‘Defamation shall consist of the publication to a third party of matter which in all the circumstances would be likely to affect a person adversely in the estimation of reasonable people generally’
According to Salmond, “The wrong of defamation lies in the publication of a false and defamatory statement about another person without lawful justification”.
According to Underhills, “a statement becomes defamation if it is made about another without just cause or excuse, whereby he suffers injury to his reputation and not to his selfesteem”.
In the Scott v Sampson: QBD 1882 case, Justice Cave has defined defamation in the simplest way. He has defined it as ‘a false statement about a man to his discredit’.
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code defines defamation with Explanations and ten exceptions and a number of illustrations.
Section 499 defines Defamation as “whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.” There are 10 exceptions given to this definition.
Constitutional Validity of Punishment for Criminal Defamation:
In Subramaniam Sawmy v. Union of India, Ministry of Law, AIR 2016 SC 2728 case, numerous petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of the offense of criminal defamation as provided for in Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 199(1) to 199(4) of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Several of the petitioners, such as Subramanian Swamy, Rahul Gandhi, and Arvind Kejriwal, are politicians who had been charged with criminal defamation. They contested the constitutionality of the offense of criminal defamation, arguing that it inhibited their right to freedom of expression. The criminal proceedings against them had stayed pending the constitutional proceedings.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed challenges to the constitutionality of the criminal offense of defamation, holding that it was a reasonable restriction on the right to freedom of expression. The Court found that there existed a constitutional duty to respect the dignity of others. The Court also found that the concept of ‘reputation’ was included in the protection of ‘dignity’, which was part of the constitutionally protected right to life. The Court also recognized the sanctity and significance of the right to freedom of speech and expression in a democracy but pointed out that it is subject to reasonable restrictions. Such restrictions should serve the public interest and should not be excessive. Legislation by which restrictions are enacted should not invade the rights and should not be arbitrary. The Court emphasized that the law on criminal defamation is clear and thus distinguished other cases in which it had struck down legislation as infringing freedom of speech. The Court went on to emphasize the importance of the concepts of constitutional fraternity and fundamental duty, under which every citizen is expected to respect the dignity of the other. Noting that this is a constitutional duty, the Court held that it could not conclude that the existence of criminal defamation is obnoxious to freedom of speech and expression. The Court took note that truth is a defense only when a statement also serves the public good, but opines that if a truthful statement is not made for any kind of public good but only to malign a person, this should not be constitutionally protected. Finally, the Court holds that the penal code provision is not disproportionate. The reasonableness and proportionality of a restriction is examined from the standpoint of the interest of the general public, and not from the point of view of the person upon whom the restrictions are imposed.
In the next article, we shall discuss, Section 499 in detail along with explanations attached to it and exceptions to it.
Conclusion:
According to Section 499, “whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.”. Thus the defamation involves harming the reputation of a person by making and publishing words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations