Media Trial, Defamation, and Character Assassination!

Reputation is an important element which adds value and quality to one’s life. We can say that reputation enables a person to live with dignity in the society. In P. Rathinam vs Union of India, referring to ‘Right to Life’, the Supreme Court said, “the word ‘Life’ doesn’t mean mere animal existence, but to live a life with human dignity”. It goes without saying that dignity is a very important part of a meaningful life. Now, the question is, “Is violation of dignity of an individual amount to violation of Right to Life as enshrined in Article 21 of our constitution?”. Let us examine. 

If a person loses his dignity in the society by virtue of his/her action(s), he/she alone is responsible for that. However, when the person’s dignity is violated by means of willful and malicious Libel or Slander by another person, then, we may have to consider that the offender violated the Right to Life of a person. In short, defamation is an act of violation of the Right of a person to lead a dignified and meaningful life. In Parmiter vs Coupland, Parke B defined defamation as ‘a publication, without justification or lawful excuse, which is calculated to injure the reputation of another, by exposing him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule’. This definition rightly sums up the act of defamation. 

In India, law deals with defamation in 2 ways. 1) Civil. 2) Criminal. In a civil suit, plaintiff can claim compensation for damages incurred by him because of the actions of the offender. In such a case, the Courts measure the damage incurred by the plaintiff due to the offender’s actions and suitable compensation is awarded. However, in criminal cases, it is not possible to quantify the damage incurred to the plaintiff/victim. In this article, I would like to deal with those cases of defamation which cause irreparable damage to the life of an individual. 

This week, the case of a lady posting the photograph of a boy on Facebook alleging that he passed lewd comments at her is being widely discussed in the media. In this case, the photograph of the boy is being shown on national television and the boy is being judged a “pervert”. The full facts are not known in this case. No witnesses, no investigation, no trial. Just based on a Facebook post by a girl, the boy is being condemned by the national media as a rogue.

Also, recently, there was a video which went viral on social media. This video showed two girls beating two boys in a public bus in Rohtak, Haryana. This attracted the attention of the media and in no time the girls appeared in all mainstream media channels and explained that the two boys in the video “molested” them. Some media channels portrayed the two girls as “Brave Hearts” while some judged the two boys guilty of molesting the two girls. Some channels showed the photographs of the two boys again and again and judged them “characterless”. At the time when this incident took place, the two boys were taking part in Indian Army’s recruitment process. Army officials reacted to the stories in the media and refused to allow these two boys from taking part in further selection process. Media passed judgments in this case even without ascertaining the facts. They just went by the published video and what the girls had to say about it. Haryana government ordered a probe into this matter and the SIT expressed doubts about the version of the girls. At the time of writing this article, the case is still in the trial court and a final judgment hasn’t come out yet. 

Here, there is one important point. Most media channels and newspapers gave prominence to what the girls said and portrayed the two boys as criminals. All this was done even before an FIR was filed and an investigation began. The two boys already lost an opportunity to attend Army recruitment process. Their photographs were flashed on all television channels portraying them as criminals. 

The above two examples go on to prove one point. We are living in very dangerous times where it just takes one social media post by a woman and the entire national media carries out the character assassination of a boy without even ascertaining the facts. There is no doubt that boys who molest/misbehave should be punished severely. But, there’s something called as a “due process” and our law states that an accused is to be presumed innocent till proven guilty by a court of law. 

Now, coming back to the main point of this article, media, being a responsible organ of our democracy, is expected to carry out due diligence before publishing any content. Here in this case, forget due diligence, media blindly went by what the two girls said and resorted to the act of defaming the two boys. Imagine the insult, pain, and social stigma the two boys and their respective families must have faced. Imagine their pain of being deprived of an opportunity to take part in the recruitment process by the Indian Army. The most painful part of this entire story is, this was done even before a formal investigation in this case began. If the court rules that the boys committed no wrong and it was indeed the girls who lied about being molested, the girls can be charged for malicious prosecution. But, what about the media? The media, which flashed the photographs of the two boys for hours together, will it then spare the same amount of television time in declaring them innocent? In this case, can the boys merely get justice by pressing a Civil suit for damages? If so, how can the damage done to them be quantified? The answer is, the pain, social stigma, and mental agony undergone the boys for falsely being portrayed as molesters cannot be quantified, and, the right thing to do is to press charges of criminal defamation against all the media channels which judged the boys guilty without trial. 

The increasing number of media trial and character assassinations by the media these days throws open the question of increasing the quantum of punishment for criminal defamation in India. Currently, Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 specifies a maximum punishment of 2 years of simple imprisonment for proven charges of criminal defamation. Considering the amount of damage defamation does to a person’s life and his/her mental and physical health, 2 years of simple imprisonment is simply not enough. There should be a debate on increasing the quantum of punishment in such cases in addition to issuing specific guidelines to the media to prevent Prime Time Kangaroo courts from passing judgments for the sake of TRPs.

There’s a world wide debate going on about decriminalizing defamation as it infringes on the freedom of speech and expression. Let’s understand one thing here. No freedom is absolute and reasonable restrictions should apply. Also, Edward Coke’s famous principle of jurisprudence, “actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea” should be applied here. Which means, “an act does not make a person guilty unless (their) mind mind is also guilty”. Therefore, an act of willful slander or libel, done with a malicious intent of defaming a person(s) should be severely punishable. This \should be applied even more strictly when it comes to media. Media, being a responsible organ of our democracy, is expected to do reasonable due diligence before passing judgments on a person’s character. Failing to perform the basic duty of ascertaining the facts before publishing half truths and lies amounts to criminal negligence and media should be held accountable for that. At the end of the day, one cannot get away without any punishment after defaming and permanently destroying the image of individual(s). 

There should be a debate on protecting the rights of an accused. Just like the way law stipulates that the identity of a rape victim should be kept confidential, it’s important to protect the identity of an accused till the trial is complete. Otherwise, those who face false allegations will not only have to face the brunt of criminal proceedings, but also social outcast and a permanent damage to their reputation.