Prelims: Current events of national and international importance | Polity & Governance
Why in news?
The Supreme Court of India’s prescription for granting pre-trial interim injunctions in defamation cases against journalists is the Bonnard standard, in Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) case.
- The Bonnard standard is a legal principle.
- Origin - Originating from the 1891 UK case Bonnard v. Perryman.
- Bonnard standard – In defamation cases, the courts should only issue an order to stop something, when they are absolutely certain the statement is false and cannot be justified.
- Purpose in India - The application of the principle in India is critical for protecting journalistic freedom and preventing powerful individuals and corporations from misusing defamation law as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).
SLAPP is a civil or criminal legal action intended to censor, intimidate, or silence individuals or organizations who speak out on matters of public interest.
- Supreme Court Affirmation -
- Bloomberg Case (2024) - The Indian Supreme Court upheld the Bonnard standard by striking down an ex parte injunction against a Bloomberg report, emphasizing the need to avoid stifling public discourse.
- Adani Case - A Delhi court's order to journalists to take down allegedly defamatory content was seen as a violation of the Bonnard standard for issuing an ex parte injunction without hearing the journalists' defenses.
- Protection of Free Speech (relation to article 19) -
- The Bonnard Standard influences the application of Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution by requiring courts to exercise extreme caution when granting pre-trial injunctions in defamation cases to prevent unwarranted prior restraint on free speech.
- To ensure that restrictions on free speech in defamation cases do not go beyond what is permissible under Article 19(2).
- Balancing Act – The principle aims to balance the right to reputation with the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.
- Exceptional Circumstances - In 2024, the Bloomberg v. Zee Entertainment case, the Supreme Court clarified what constitutes an "exceptional situation" that could warrant overriding the standard.
- Such circumstances are limited to cases where the defamatory content is malicious and really false.
- Three-Fold Test – It is a general legal standard for granting any interim injunction, including in defamation cases.
- A prima facie case - The plaintiff must present sufficient evidence to convince the court that there is a genuine and serious issue to be tried
- Balance of convenience - The court must compares the trouble the plaintiff will face if the injunction is denied to the trouble the defendant will face if the injunction is granted.
- Irreparable harm/loss - The plaintiff must demonstrate that they would suffer irreparable injury that cannot be adequately compensated with money.
Plaintiff - A person who starts a legal action against somebody in a court of law.
Quick Facts
|
Defamation
|
- It is defined as making or publishing a false statement about a person, intending to harm their reputation, under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
- This act can be done through spoken words, signs, or visible representations, and it constitutes defamation if it causes harm to their good name or makes people shun them.
- Defamation is both a civil and a criminal wrong in India.
|
References
- Indian Express | Bonnard standard
- Nath Solicitors | Bonnard v Perryman
