In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, led by Justice Rakesh Kainthla, delineated the boundaries of freedom of speech in the context of defamation. The case involved Jagat Singh Negi, a State Revenue, Horticulture, and Tribal Development Minister and Congress leader, who filed a complaint against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Surat Singh Negi.
Also read-Himachal Pradesh High Court Affirms Motherhood As A Fundamental Right (lawchakra.in)
The controversy arose from Surat Singh Negi’s allegations during a press conference, accusing Jagat Singh Negi of corruption related to travel allowances. The initial trial court dismissed the complaint, emphasizing the accused’s right to criticize public officials. However, upon revision, the High Court offered a contrasting perspective.
Justice Kainthla, in his judgment delivered on January 11, 2024, stated,
“Calling a person corrupt is per se defamatory as it tends to lower the estimation of the person in the eyes of the public and cannot be justified by resorting to Article 19 of the Constitution of India.”
This remark underscores the court’s position that freedom of speech is not an absolute right and is subject to certain limitations, particularly when it impinges on an individual’s reputation.
The High Court scrutinized the trial court’s approach, noting,
“The learned Trial Court was swayed by Article 19 of the Constitution of India. It was rightly submitted that this Article is not absolute but subject to the exceptions carved out in it.”
The court emphasized that while criticism of public officials is a part of a vibrant democracy, it does not extend to the right to defame.
Justice Kainthla further elaborated,
“Granting the right to abuse and defame a person will not make a democracy healthy and vibrant but will turn it into a mudslinging arena where the opposition and dissent will be crushed by abuses and slurs.”
Also read-Bombay High Court Rebukes Sessions Judge For Stereotyping Transgender Individuals (lawchakra.in)
This statement reflects the court’s concern about the potential misuse of freedom of speech in the political arena.
The court rejected the trial court’s notion that politicians should be resilient to criticism, stressing the importance of balancing freedom of speech with the right to protect an individual’s reputation. Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal, the court highlighted the right of individuals in high office to seek legal recourse against false and vexatious charges of corruption.
In conclusion, the High Court partly allowed the revision petition and set aside the Trial Court’s order. Surat Singh Negi was ordered to be summoned for the commission of an offense punishable under Section 500 of the IPC. Both parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on March 12, 2024.
This ruling by the Himachal Pradesh High Court is a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse on the limits of freedom of speech in India, particularly concerning defamation and the protection of individual reputations.
Also read-Calcutta High Court Approves Live Telecast For Ram Mandir Inauguration (lawchakra.in)
