Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Kerala High Court has held that mere reporting of a complaint’s particulars does not amount to defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as the same does not imply that the allegations stated therein are true and accurate.

The court, presided over by Justice G. Girish, made the observation while quashing the defamation case against Malayala Manorama Chief Editor Mammen Mathew and Publisher Jacob Mathew. “The mere publication of an imputation by itself may not constitute the offence of defamation unless such imputation has been made with the intention, knowledge or belief that such imputation will harm the reputation of the person concerned,” the court said.

The case originated from two news reports published by Malayala Manorama on August 10 and 11, 2017, regarding allegations against K. Bhaskaran Master, a CPM leader and the complainant in the case. The reports detailed allegations that Bhaskaran had physically assaulted a Dalit woman party worker and had failed to issue receipts for election funds collected from the public. While the first report did not mention Bhaskaran by name, the second report identified him and noted his relationship as the husband of a State Minister.

Bhaskaran alleged that the newspaper’s local reporter (Accused No. 1) had personal enmity against him due to municipal actions against the reporter for illegal subletting of municipal property. It was further contended that the reporter published false allegations to tarnish his image and that the newspaper’s Chief Editor and Publisher (Accused Nos. 2 & 3) were responsible for the defamatory publication.

The accused/petitioners pointed out that the reports merely conveyed the existence of a complaint without asserting the truth of its contents. The petitioners contended that the complaint did not establish the essential ingredients of defamation under Section 500 IPC, as they were neither involved in nor had any intent to harm the complainant’s reputation.

The court noted that for an offence under Section 500 IPC to be made out, there must be an intentional publication of imputations harming a person’s reputation. “There is absolutely no indication in the above reports that the incident mentioned in the above complaint of the lady were found to be true. The mere reporting of the particulars of the aforesaid complaint does not mean that the allegations in the said complaint were depicted as true and correct. In other words, the reports in the said newspaper about the complaint preferred by the lady against the defacto complainant cannot be termed as an act on the part of the persons concerned to publish an imputation which would lower the dignity and reputation of the defacto complainant in the estimation of others,” observed the court. 

Referencing the precedents established in V.S. Achuthanandan v. Kamalamma (2008) and Mammen Mathew v. Radhakrishna M.N. (2007), the court ruled, “It is well-settled that in the absence of the necessary materials to show that there was mala fide intention on the part of the accused to tarnish the image of the defacto complainant, no offence under Section 500 IPC could be made out against the publishers of a newspaper who are arraigned as the accused in that complaint.”

In light of these observations, the court quashed the case against the petitioners terming the criminal proceedings as “an abuse of  process of law.”

 

Cause Title: Mammen Mathew v K Bhaskaran Master [CRL.MC NO. 7420 OF 2018]

Appearance: For the Petitioners- Advocate Millu Dandapani; For the Respondents- Advocate M. Sasindran and Public Prosecutor Sangeetharaj N.R.