Published on: 27 August 2023 at 14:11 IST
Court: High Court of Bombay
Citation: SMH Power Corporation Ltd. V. Chitroopa Palit (2004)
Honourable High Court of Bombay has held that Private Individuals cannot seek refuge under the provision of Article 19 of the Constitution of India for freedom of speech as a defence to the Tort of Defamation. It is held that Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India makes it clear that the citizens right of freedom of speech and expression will not affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law, so far as such law imposes a reasonable restriction on the exercise of the right especially in the case of defamation.
54. Article 19 is basically an article which guarantees various freedoms to the Indian citizens and those freedoms cannot be infringed upon by the State or such authority, except as contemplated under clause (2) of Art. 19. That is to say, it is a kind of fetter on the States power to limit those freedoms.
The State cannot limit those freedoms except to the limited extent as contemplated under Art. 19(2). The above Article has nothing to do with regard to the two private parties, in the sense, the respondents cannot claim such an unfettered right of freedom of speech and expression against the Appellant Company.
In this context, as has rightly been pointed out by Mr. Vahanvati, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.D. Shamdasani v. Central Bank of India Ltd., has clearly held that the scope of freedom under Art. 19 of the Constitution of India, is basically the protection against the States action, whereby the right should not be curtailed. Even if the State were to curtail that right, they can do so only on those limited grounds as specified in Art. 19(2) of the Constitution of India. In any event even under Art. 19(1)(a) citizen does not have a right to make a defamation statement.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
