[Defamation] There Is No Absolute Privilege For Statements Made On Oath Or Otherwise In Judicial Proceedings: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

A similar finding was earlier rendered by the high court in Shybimon v. Haridas, 2010 (2) KLT 158.

The present order was passed by Justice R. Narayana Pisharadi in a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the complaint and consequent proceedings initiated against the Petitioner for allegedly defaming the Complainant during the course of separate judicial proceedings.

The Petitioner had instituted a writ petition against the Complainant, wherein the Petitioner was alleged to have made defamatory averments in his petition, accusing the Complainant of being a goon.

Noting that the main ingredient of the offence, "publication" had been satisfied, the high court refused to quash the impugned proceedings. "Once a statement is filed in a court of law, it can be considered as published," the court held. Reliance was placed on Prabhakaran v. Gangadharan, 2006 (2) KLT 122.

The court declined the Petitioner's argument that averments made in a complaint during the course of judicial proceedings do not attract the offence of defamation, punishable under Section 500 IPC, as they enjoy absolute privilege. It rather observed,

"The privilege defined by the exceptions to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code must be regarded as exhaustive as to the cases which they purport to cover and recourse cannot be had to the English Common Law to add new grounds of exception to those contained in the statute."

It was further held that whether or not exception 9 to Section 499 of IPC, which protects statements made in good faith for protection of the interests of the person making it, will apply in the Petitioner's case was a subject matter of trial. Reliance was placed on Shatrughna Prasad Sinha v. Rajbhau Surajmal Rathi, (1996) 6 SCC 263.

"Ordinarily, the question as to whether the statement in a given case falls under any of the ten exceptions to Section 499 I.P.C will have to be decided only after trial and the burden to bring the libel or slander under any of those exceptions is, by virtue of Section 105 of the Indian Evidence Act, on the accused.

xxx

the question whether the petitioner had made the imputations against the complainant in the writ petition in good faith for the protection of his interest is a matter which cannot be decided in a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC," the court held and dismissed the petition.

Case Details:

Case Title: MKVarghese Cor Episcopa v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Case No.: Crl. MC. No. 6794/2019

Quorum: Justice R. Narayana Pisharadi

Appearance: Advocates Krvinod, Ms Letha, Ks Sreerekha and Nabil Khader (for Petitioner); Public Prosecutor V Sreeja (for State)

Click Here To Download Judgment

Read Judgment