Supreme Court Judge Calls for Decriminalization of Defamation to Prevent Misuse by Private Individuals
Justice M.M. Sundresh of the Supreme Court recently remarked that the time has come to decriminalize defamation. He expressed concern over the increasing use of criminal defamation laws by private individuals and political parties to settle personal scores. While the court upheld the constitutional validity of criminal defamation in the 2016 Subramanian Swamy case, recent benches have been more critical, often staying summons and advising against being 'too touchy.' The debate centers on whether defamation between private parties serves any public interest or if it merely stifles free speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a).
Key Points
- Justice M.M. Sundresh suggested that defamation by private individuals should not be treated as a crime.
- The Supreme Court had previously upheld criminal defamation as a 'reasonable restriction' on free speech in 2016.
- Recent judicial observations suggest that courts should not be forums for settling political scores through defamation cases.
- Criminal defamation is often viewed as a tool that infringes upon the fundamental right to life and reputation.
Exam Facts
- Subramanian Swamy versus Union of India case (2016).
- Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution (Right to freedom of speech and expression).
- Justice M.M. Sundresh.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.