The Karnataka High Court recently junked a defamation case against public works development minister Satish Jarkiholi, who had been accused of defaming Hindus. The court also quashed criminal proceedings against BJP MLA Basanagouda Patil Yatnal for uttering remarks unpalatable to the state Congress unit.
The cases are the latest in a slew of defamation suits being filed across the country, most often by politicians or their supporters against compatriots’ sideswipes. Another case recently landed in the Supreme Court when AAP leader Satyendar Jain, who spent 18 months in jail before getting bail in a money laundering case, took umbrage at BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj’s allegation that he had amassed disproportionate wealth and was a fraud.
The trend of filing defamation cases citing ‘hurt sentiments’ and ‘personal anguish’ is dragging political slugfests into the legal arena. It’s left to courts to constantly redraw the fine line between the freedom of speech and the grey zone of defamation, where the hurt sentiments or reputations of a person or a community can be validated. In Jarkiholi’s case, the judge ruled that “a definite class of people” was not defamed and so it did not fall under Section 499 (defamation) of the Penal Code.
Cognisance was taken of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s remarks on the Modi surname - which led to his conviction, sentencing and subsequent disqualification as a member of parliament until the Supreme Court stayed his conviction.
Defamation cases are being increasingly used as a tool to intimidate political rivals and curb criticism. This raises questions on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression in the political field. The conviction rate in defamation cases is low - only one in seven accused had been found guilty by the higher judiciary in 2018, the latest year for which such a number is available.
Courts are regularly quashing defamation and sedition suits, warning that entertaining them would be an abuse of the process of law. Until there is more clarity on what exactly constitutes defamation, such suits will only waste the judiciary’s precious time. It can be said that some such comments are best ignored. But Indian politicians are not known for their sense of humour, and now, for their sense of tolerance too.