Introduction
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held the Chief Editor of the Him Ujala newspaper guilty in a criminal defamation case under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Court ruled that printing slanderous and unwarranted comments such as calling a person a “Gunda” or accusing him of spreading “Gundaraj” harms personal reputation and is not in any public interest.
Background
The case was filed on a complaint by a businessman (Appellant) that a defamatory news article had been brought against him in Him Ujala. The article, published by the accused No. 2, Chief Editor, stated that the complainant was a “Natakbaj” (drama artist), a “Gunda,” and one of a group of “Shallow Theatre People” who was violating public peace and promulgating “Gundaraj.”
This publication was preceded by a string of grievances between the complainant and Ramesh Kumar (accused No. 1), the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat, Gorkhuwala. The complainant had earlier filed complaints against accused No. 1 for misappropriation, resulting in personal hostility and alleged counter-retaliation in the form of false cases and defamation by means of publication.
The Trial Court acquitted the both accused, holding that the news report was on the basis of a press note and that there was not sufficient evidence of malice or intent to injure. The complainant was not pleased with the acquittal and approached the High Court.
Key Points
Justice Rakesh Kainthla of the Himachal Pradesh High Court heard the appeal and passed the judgment.
The High Court clarified that imputations uttered without a cause—such as referring to a person as a “Gunda” or accusing a breach of peace—may result in reputational damage and sustain a conviction under Section 500 IPC.
The accused No. 2 (Chief Editor) had not made any independent investigation of the facts reported in the news report prior to publishing it.
The publication was not related to any known or established misconduct on the part of the complainant; there was no proof that he belonged to any theatre group or had violated public peace.
The Court made it clear that the defence of good faith and public interest was not available when there was no reasonable inquiry or truth.
The argument that publication was on the basis of a press note was also turned down since republication does not exempt one from the liability for defamation.
Recent Developments
Accused No. 2, the Chief Editor of Him Ujala, was convicted by the High Court under Section 500 IPC.
The acquittal of accused No. 1, Ramesh Kumar, was maintained as the Court held the Trial Court’s justification to be correct in his case.
The ruling reaffirms that freedom of the press does not cover unjustified defamatory statements and that editorial responsibility entails ascertaining the truth of allegations.
The Court noted that malice is not needed to establish criminal defamation, and it is only important whether the statement was uttered with intent—or could reasonably be inferred—to injure a person’s reputation.
Conclusion
This ruling is a landmark in reconciling freedom of the press and the right to reputation. The Himachal Pradesh High Court has clarified that editors and journalists cannot hide behind press releases or allegations of public interest when printing unsubstantiated and defamatory material. The ruling emphasizes the need for responsible journalism and asserts legal recourse available to individuals against reputational damage occasioned by frivolous public claims.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY AYUSHI TRIVEDI
