HC restrains NGO from making defamatory statements against EPS

Right to privacy and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is a fundamental right while right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is “subject to reasonable restrictions”, the court added

Chennai: Observing that the right to free speech doesn’t give one the right to defame others, the Madras high court on Friday restrained anti-corruption outfit Arappor Iyakkam, an NGO, from making derogatory statements against Tamil Nadu’s leader of the opposition and AIADMK’s interim general secretary Edappadi Palaniswami (EPS).

The court said that after Arappor lodged a complaint, they uploaded the same on social media, which was followed by a press statement and carried widely in news with prima facie baseless allegations of corrupt practice causing disrepute to EPS’ name. (HT Archives)

Arappor had complained to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) in July that EPS, who was chief minister from 2017-2021 and held the highways portfolio, had shown favouritism in awarding tenders in the highways department leading to corruption of ₹692crore. The court said that after Arappor lodged a complaint, they uploaded the same on social media, which was followed by a press statement and carried widely in news with prima facie baseless allegations of corrupt practice causing disrepute to EPS’ name.

Justice Krishnan Ramasamy in his orders said that a prima facie case is made out and balance of convenience lies in favour of EPS. “This Court, prima facie, is satisfied that the statements made by the respondents are defamatory in nature and uploading the same in social media are deliberate and intentional act to defame the dignity and reputation of the applicant in order to demoralise him in the society,” the orders said. “Right to free speech does not give a right to an individual to defame others. The citizens have a correlative duty of not interfering with the liberty of other individuals since everybody has a right to reputation and right to live with dignity. It is well settled that in a democratic set up, no one has the right to disparage the reputation of another.”

Right to privacy and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is a fundamental right while right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is “subject to reasonable restrictions”, the court added.

The Justice also said that normally, the court will hesitate to grant the pre-trial injunction in defamation cases but in the present case, the respondents had made criminal complaints with false allegations. “Any baseless publications if made against the political persons defaming their reputation, it would have considerable impact throughout their career as politicians, who later strives hard to get confidence among the public who would form a bad opinion by way of such defamatory publications,” the court said. “It is in the public interest that the reputation of public figures should not be debased falsely.”

While Arappor had contended that they cannot be barred from making statements which are true and as a public figure EPS has to face criticism, the AIADMK’s counsel argued that the respondents had joined hands with the ruling government and disgruntled (expelled) AIADMK members. In July, AIADMK elected EPS as their single leader abolishing the dual leadership and expelling O Panneerselvam (OPS).

The interim injunction restrains the respondents and “their men” from releasing, circulating, publishing or indulging in any kind of accusations, insinuations, allegations, circulation, uploading of articles, letters, correspondence and giving press interviews or posting any items, messages on social media.