The Delhi High Court, recently in its ruling directed the news media house, News18, in sharing the content via Youtube of a discussion during which a BJP spokesperson, Sanju Verma made derogatory statements regarding Congress’ Dr Shama Mohamed. In addition, the social media platform X has also been ordered to remove a series of tweets which allegedly caused defamation to Mohamed.
Brief Facts of the Case
As the debate unfolded on August 20, the argue went on to state that, Verma referred to Mohamed as a “Bewakoof Aurat” (foolish woman) and claimed that “Shama Mohamed is as shameless as they come.” The court held these were clearly disparaging remarks that were likely to inflict real injury to the reputation of Mohamed, especially given that she was serving as the national spokesperson of congress and was a dentist as well.
Courts Findings
Additionally, Justice Mahajan dismissed the ludicrous jibes as branding of Mohamed as a “MadrassaBred Bigot” by Verma. The court opined these were not fair such remarks as would have been expected in the conduct of public debates as law would demand. It was asserted that protection under law from defamation is warranted as reputation of a person is a vital aspect of his or her dignity.
Legal Perspective
On the one hand, the court observed that Article 19(1)(a) confers upon every citizen the right to
freedom of speech and expression and on the other hand it is not an absolute right. It may be
reasonable and justifiable to restrict it in certain cases such as incitement or defamation. Justice Mahajan has said: “This freedom has to be exercised with caution and cannot be anexcuse to infringe the rights of other people”, especially concerning those political actors
Backstory of the Case
Following the debate, Dr. Shama Mohamed lodged a suit for defamation against Verma claiming he did not debate her assertions, but rather resorted to personal abuse. The attorneys representing Dr. Shama state that News18 has a tradition of allowing such offensive and slanderous expressions on its site. Previous cases of such violations attracted penalties from the National Broadcasting and Digital Standards Authority for inappropriate broadcasting practice.
Ruling Of The Court
In its ruling, the court not only directed the removal of offending articles but also called for Verma, News18, and the sites for the online content for further steps. In Indian context, harming reputation of a person can lead to defamation charges under section 499 of IPC (Indian penal code) which can have serious repercussions.
Consequences of Defamation
Defamation victims may lose their legal damage to their standing in society.
- Legal Consequences
Defamation actions are possible whereby the aggrieved victim proves that such actions have caused
serious damage to his or her reputation and is awarded damages in millions if he or she manages to
win the case. - Damaging One’s Good Name
This may for years affect the good name of an individual or organization; it may also affect personal
life, bring disorders to professions or occupations and influence people’s views.
- Social Media Role
Contrastingly, Social Networking Sites are constructive as well as destructive, in the instance of the
latter, these move with speed, width and in a very short time, and this for correction becomes too late.
There is a tendency of the public to insult and attack indignantly prominent figures due to misplaced
information. - Impacts of the Issue
This causes a psychological effect mainly stress and anxiety and most importantly affects the mental
stability of the person whose persona is tarnished.
Summary
The controversy surrounding the judgment of the Delhi High Court against Sanju Verma makes the
case in favour of political speech limits, and the latter for caution in making allegations against
persons and entities in the context of the law and its administration.
