Personal Skill Development Activity

Claimants or
Defendants?
Who does the current law on defamation
benefit the most?

Presented By: Upasana Tyagi

Course: BBA LLB (Hons.)
Session: 2023-28
Enrollment No.: 35151103523
Contents
01 02 03
What is Defamation as a Essential Elements
Defamation? tort of Defamation
04 05 06
Defamation Law To whom does it Case Laws
in India benefit?

07
Conclusion
What is Defamation?
Defamation is a communication that injures a
third party's reputation and causes a legally
redressable injury. In the English-speaking
world, the law of defamation traditionally
distinguishes between libel (written, printed,
posted online, and published in mass media)
and slander (oral speech). It is treated as a civil
wrong (tort, delict), as a criminal offense, or
both.
Defamation as a Defamation is a type of tort that falls under the
Tort broader category of civil law. A tort is a wrongful act
that causes harm to another person or their property,
and for which the injured party can seek
compensation. In the case of defamation, the harm is
caused by the false statement made by the
defendant, which damages the reputation of the
plaintiff.
Defamation is one of the many types of torts that
can be committed, and it carries legal consequences
for the person who made the false statements.

Essential Elements
of Defamation
Several key elements must be
present for a plaintiff to
successfully bring a
defamation claim.
The statement must be false: The plaintiff must prove
that the statement made about them is false. If the
statement is true, then it cannot be defamatory.
Unprivileged: Unlike privileged statements, which are
shielded by law under specific circumstances like court
proceedings or legislative debates, unprivileged
statements are susceptible to defamation claims if they
meet the criteria for falsehood, publication, and harm to
reputation.
Publication: The plaintiff must prove that the defamatory
statement was communicated to at least one other
person, either orally or in writing.
Falsity: The plaintiff must prove that the defendant knew
or should have known that the statement was false or
defamatory and that they made the statement with
reckless disregard for the truth.
Injury: Defamation must result in harm to the reputation
of the individual or entity being defamed.
Defamation Law in India
The Constitution of India grants its citizens the
fundamental right of freedom of speech subject to
reasonable restrictions.
Defamation is defined under section 499 of the IPC and
the punishment for it is dealt with in section 500. IPC Le Claimant:
defines defamation as any spoken, written, or visual
statement about any person damaging their reputation.
Section 499 goes further and protects the rights of a
deceased person, according to section 499 of IPC, for
defamation of a deceased person to be held, the
statement must hurt the feelings of the family or close
relatives, and it must damage the reputation of the
deceased individual if the person were still alive.
While section 499 of the IPC defines defamation,
section 500 states punishment for the same.
To Whom Does it The balance of benefit in defamation law can vary depending on
the specific circumstances of each case and the jurisdiction in
Benefit? which it is tried. However, traditionally, defamation laws have
been structured to strike a balance between protecting an
Claimant or individual's reputation (the claimant) and safeguarding freedom
Defendant? of expression (the defendant). In many legal systems, the
burden of proof lies with the claimant to demonstrate that the
statement in question is defamatory and false. Defendants, on
Arey Kehna kya the other hand, may benefit from certain defenses such as
truth, privilege, or fair comment, which can protect them from
chahte ho? liability even if the statement is deemed defamatory. That said,
the balance may shift depending on factors such as the
jurisdiction's legal standards, the nature of the statement, the
parties involved, and prevailing societal norms. For instance, in
some jurisdictions, the law might be more favorable to
claimants, offering stronger protections against defamation,
while in others, the emphasis might lean more toward protecting
freedom of speech, thus favoring defendants. Overall, it's
challenging to determine a definitive answer as to who benefits
more from defamation law without considering the specific
context of individual cases and the legal framework in place.
 Defamation law provides claimants with a means to
protect their reputation and seek recourse if they
believe they have been defamed. If someone spreads
false and damaging statements about them,
defamation law allows claimants to take legal action to
restore their reputation and seek damages for any
harm caused.

Benefits to
Claimants may benefit from the ability to obtain
Claimants court orders or injunctions to stop the further
spread of defamatory statements.

Defamation law may also serve as a deterrent,

discouraging individuals or entities from making
false statements that could harm someone's
reputation.
 Defendants benefit from legal defenses available
under defamation law. For instance, if the statement in
question is true, defendants may be protected from
liability as truth is generally a complete defense
against defamation.

Defendants may also benefit from other defenses

Benefits to such as privilege, which protects statements made in
certain contexts, such as during legal proceedings or
Defendant in legislative debates.

Defamation law may also provide defendants with

procedural protections, such as requirements for
claimants to prove specific elements of defamation,
which can help shield defendants from baseless or
frivolous claims.
 Landmark Cases

D.P.Choudhary v/s. Arun Jaitley Vs. Arvind

Manjulatha
A publication was made in the local
newspaper, Dainik Navjyothi that the plaintiff
a 17-year-old college girl ran away with a boy
after she went out of the house by saying she
was having lectures. This false news item had
adverse effects on her and ruined her
marriage prospects. It was actionable per se
and she was awarded damages of Rs.10000/-
by way of general damages.
Kejriwal
The court held that statements made by
Arvind Kejriwal and his five other leaders were
defamatory. The matter was sorted out when
all the defendants apologized for their
actions.
 Conclusion
In conclusion, defamation law serves to balance
the competing interests of claimants and
defendants, aiming to protect both reputations
and freedom of expression. While claimants
benefit from the ability to seek redress for harm
caused by defamation, defendants also benefit
from essential legal defenses and procedural
protections. The effectiveness of defamation law in
achieving this balance depends on various factors,
including the specific circumstances of each case,
prevailing societal norms, and the evolving legal
landscape.
Thank you
Presented By: Upasana Tyagi