CHENNAI: An advocate who acted professionally as per his client’s instruction cannot be made criminally liable for defamation, the Madras High Court has observed. Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan made the observation while quashing a criminal defamation complaint made against advocate ML Ganesh and his client for statements made before National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in an insolvency proceedings case.
The case pertains to an application filed by an advocate, on behalf of a committee of creditors, before NCLT seeking to remove chartered accountant V Venkata Siva Kumar as the resolution professional. The chartered accountant subsequently filed a criminal defamation complaint against the committee of creditors and the lawyer. He alleged that the statements made by them were defamatory.
The petition in the high court by the advocate and the committee of creditors sought to quash defamation complaint. Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan in his order relied on several judgements made by the Supreme Court and high courts. The court observed that it has been repeatedly held that an advocate who acted professionally as per the instruction of his or her client cannot be made criminally liable for the offence of defamation under Section 500 of IPC unless the contrary is alleged and established.
“It is held that a lawyer is an advocate, one who speaks for another. Naturally, beyond what his client tells him, the lawyer has no opportunity to test truth or falsity of the story put forward by client,” the judge said.
“Therefore, no lawyer could ever be prosecuted for defamation with regard to any instruction which he might have been given to him, because it is the lawyer’s business to decide....
whatever responsibility might ensue from acting upon those instruction would be his, and no one else’s, is opposed to the entire trend of decisions defining the scope and extent of the privilege conferred upon the lawyer.” The court then quashed the defamation complaint against the lawyer and committee.
Earlier judgements
Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan in his order relied on several judgements. The court observed that it has been held that an advocate who acted professionally as per the instruction of client cannot be made criminally liable for the offence of defamation under Section 500 of IPC unless contrary is alleged and established.