Calling a person corrupt is per se defamatory, can't be justified under freedom of speech: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently observed that no person has the right to call someone corrupt as long as the offence of defamation exists on the statute books [Jagat Singh Negi v. Surat Singh Negi]..“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,” the Court said.Justice Rakesh Kainthla made the observation while partly allowing a petition filed by State Revenue, Horticulture and Tribal Development Minister and Congress leader Jagat Singh Negi against a trial court order dismissing his defamation complaint against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Surat Singh Negi.The Court ordered that Surat Negi (accused) be summoned for the commission of offence punishable under Section 500 (defamation) of Indian Penal Code for calling Jagat Negi (petitioner) corrupt. .Jagat Negi had filed the complaint alleging that Surat Negi in a press conference had accused him of corruption in relation to withdrawal of excess travelling allowance from the Himachal Pradesh Forest Corporation. However, the trial court held that the opposition had a right to criticise the ruling party and that such criticism is essential for a vibrant democracy. Politicians should not be thin-skinned and hypersensitive, the trial court had remarked while dismissing Jagat Negi’s complaint..Challenging the dismissal before the High Court, Jagat Negi’s counsel contended that the right to speech and expression is not absolute. It was also argued that the right to criticism does not extend to hurling abuses and defamation..After considering the submissions, the Court opined that the statement made by Surat Negi that Jagat Negi had withdrawn the excess amount can amount to “criticism of the public official and exposure of his acts”.However, it added that calling a person corrupt lowers his estimation in the eyes of the public and is per defamatory. “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 added..The Court concluded that the trial court erred in holding that the accused was justified in calling the petitioner corrupt, adding that it was swayed by the “promotion of healthy and vibrant democracy” by the right of criticism.However, it opined that there is a right to criticism, but not a right to abuse and defame any person.“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.”.Thus, the Court partly allowed the plea and set aside the trial court order. Ordering that the accused be summoned for the offence of defamation under Section 500 of IPC, the Court directed the parties to appear before trial court on March 12.Advocates Nitin Thakur and Udit Shaurya represented the petitioner..[Read Judgment]