Section 499 – Indian Penal Code

1. Section 499 – Indian Penal Code By MayuriMahajan (9411) PratikMukne (9415) VinayaPatil (9418) Khushi Sen (9423)

2. Introduction According to the Indian Penal Code: • 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

3. In Simple Terms… • Defamation may be by words, either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or visible representation • Any person who makes or publishes any accusation concerning any person, knowing or having reason to believe that such accusation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, to defame that person

5. Punishment For Defamation • Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both

6. Cyber Crime • Cyber crimes can involve criminal activities that are traditional in nature, such as theft, fraud, forgery, defamation and mischief, all of which are subject to the Indian Penal Code • The abuse of computers has also given birth to a gamut of new age crimes that are addressed by the Information Technology Act, 2000

7. Cyber Defamation SMC Pneumatics (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Jogesh Kwatra: • India’s first case of cyber defamation was reported when a company’s employee (defendant) started sending derogatory, defamatory and obscene e-mails about its Managing Director • The e-mails were anonymous and frequent, and were sent to many of their business associates to tarnish the image and goodwill of the plaintiff company

8. Cyber Defamation • The plaintiff was able to identify the defendant with the help of a private computer expert and moved the Delhi High Court • The court granted an ad-interim injunction and restrained the employee from sending, publishing and transmitting e-mails, which are defamatory or derogatory to the plaintiffs

9. Media & Defamation Restrictions on media: Under the Indian Constitution •  The Supreme Court and High Courts are empowered to intervene and punish the publication of any matter, which causes prejudice to a pending proceeding, to keep the stream of justice clear and pure so that parties may proceed with safety both to themselves and to their character •  No person can flout the mandate of law of respecting the courts for establishment of rule of law under the cloak of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution

10. Trial By Media •  Nowadays, the sensationalism involved in certain high profile criminal cases has become very common with the spread of mass communication • Example can be taken from the recent Aarushi murder case •  Moreover, such media trials unnecessarily draw the judiciary into the public scanner, often making a mockery of the justice delivery system

11. Case 1 • Criminal Defamation Against Tamil bi-weekly Junior Vikatan • Vikatan had published article against Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi •  Complaint was filed against the author of the article and Editor, Printer and Publisher •  Principal Session Judge P Devdoss adjourned hearing in the case

12. Case 2 • FIR against Vijaya Karnataka for Dalit abuse • FIR was registered against Vijaya Karnataka daily in Kavoor Police station • Vijaya Karnataka had published defamatory and abusive artice against SC, ST lecturer of Mangalore

13. Case 2 •  Defamatory article was published against Mangalore university Journalism Department Lecturer Umeshchandra •  FIR was registered under SC, ST prevention of Atrocities Act •  Even though FIR was registered once again the daily published abusive article

15. Case 3 Kareena-Shahid photos not in good taste: SC •  A debate over media ethics fueled by the media releasing to the public the photographs of two Bollywood actors in an intimate posture reached the Supreme Court •  Two judges, hearing a case relating to media rights, observed that it was not in good taste  • A Bench comprising Mr Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, hearing the preliminary arguments

16. Case 3 • The petitions, “by the Hindu” Editor N. Ravi and others, were filed in the wake of several defamation cases lodged by the Tamil Nadu Government against them for allegedly publishing defamatory news items and articles •  The court further hinted at the need to create a balance between public interest and defamation so that the freedom was not stretched beyond limits

17. Case 3 • Earlier, when the petition was sought to be dismissed as most of the cases had been withdrawn by the Tamil Nadu Government, Advocate Salve highlighted the importance of the issue that involved important question of law especially with regard to press freedom •  He stated “We are a newspaper and we have to report several happenings for public interest. We cannot have Section 499 of the IPC always staring at us. It has a chilling effect.”

18. Case 4 • Ahmedabad: A defamation case has been filed against Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy for allegedly using slanderous language against Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi

19. Case 4 • The suit was filed by Gujarat Youth Congress General Secretary Prakash Gurjar in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, B.T. Dave • The complaint has been filed under section 499(Defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

20. Case 5 • Defamation case against A.R Rahman and Anil Kapoor

21. Case 5 • In a complaint filed before a local court in Mumbai Tapeshwar Vishwakarma, general secretary of Slum-dwellers Joint Action Committee, has alleged that the film depicted slum-dwellers in bad taste as it used the derogatory and objectionable title 'Slumdog Millionaire' thus calling Indians dogs and slum dwellers slum dogs, which is defamatory

22. Case 5 • The meaning of 'Slumdog Millionaire' in Hindi is the millionaire dog of slum-dwellers, Vishwakarma alleged, adding that such a name was a violation of human rights and honour • Vishwakarma said he has already approached the national and state human rights commissions for necessary action against Rahman and Kapoor, who portrays the role of a game show host in the film

23. Case 6 • Tamil actress Khushboo • Interview to English periodical “India Today” in September 2005 • Degenerating remarks against Tamil women, spoke of pre- marital sex etc • A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice M.K. Sharma

24. Case 7 • School teacher Uma Khurana accused of running a sex racket • Complaint against Sudhir Choudhary, CEO of TV channel “Live India” • Fake Sting operation that stirred violence in Sarvoday Kanya Vidyalaya

25. Case 8 • Shah Rukh Khan vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. • Dated: 20/8/2007 • Movie: Ram Jaane

26. Case 8 • Complaint against: Shah Rukh Khan (Actor), Rajeev Mehra (Director), Pravesh Mehra (Producer), the Co-Script-writer, the female lead, the distributors for Rajasthan and for India • Defamation of the lawyer community due to Shah Rukh Khan’s statement in the movie

27. Conclusion • Defamation law doesn't work well to protect reputations • It prevents the dialogue and debate which is necessary to seek the truth • Published statements - including libellous ones - are open, available to be criticised and refuted • The worst part of defamation law is its chilling effect on free speech

28. Conclusion • Thus, Section 499 has different sub-sections and categories, which were evident through these few cases • In the contemporary society, defamation has got several aspects to itself. People have become increasingly aware of the Legal system and are rising against such injustice • Hence, we, as media students, need to understand the system ourselves • Being aware of your rights and observing some simple guidelines can help you make informed choices about what to say and publish

29. Thank You !