Shubhankar Paul, Research Scholar at Raiganj University
ABSTRACT
In a political system based on democracy, the right to free speech and expression is seen as a fundamental right; yet, this right is not unrestricted and must adhere to several acceptable boundaries; defamation is one of these boundaries. Defamation is a contested area of law in India. Thus, it should only be utilized as a legal strategy in the event of a major violation of the right to one's reputation. Otherwise, it is a risky opulence that should be avoided. A lawsuit for defamation can have numerous negative repercussions, including loss of both time and money, in addition to the inappropriate application of judicial resources. In addition, an excessive amount of defamation lawsuits has an intimidating impact on freedom of speech and expression. The most recent events in the field of law have re-ignited an argument on defamation, the primary focus of which is making defamation a civil rather than a criminal offence. This paper explores the concept of defamation with a comparative analysis of laws governing defamation and investigates the controversy regarding defamation in the context of an assortment of concluded court decisions, beginning with Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India and ending with Rahul Gandhi's defamation case.
Keywords: Defamation, freedom of speech and expression, Reputation, Criminalized, Civil Wrong, Criminal Wrong.
Comments