E-Paper
SC seeks govt reply on corporate dignity
NEW DELHI: Does a corporate house have the right to reputation under the Constitution? The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre’s response on this question
NEW DELHI: Does a corporate house have the right to reputation under the Constitution? The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre’s response on this question raised by Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai.
A bench comprising Justice JS Khehar and Justice Arun Misra issued notice to the government on Pillai’s petition that challenges constitutional validity of the defamation law, which allows even corporate houses and companies to file criminal defamation cases against individuals.
Giving eight weeks time to the Centre and Essar Company to file their response, the bench said “It is a very important issue.” “You have to apply your mind and tell us.”
Essar has filed a criminal defamation case against Pillai. It is pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Waidhan, Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh.
Filed in 2014, the suit followed her public criticism in her
blog about the alleged environmental degradation caused on account of Essar’s power project in the state.
When BJP leader Subramanian Swamy requested the court to let him be a party in the case and argued the British-era archaic IPC provision should be declared unconstitutional, the bench said the Parliament should take up the matter.
“You are a parliamentarian. You are telling us,” bench told Swamy who criticised top court’s verdict upholding the law that criminalises defamation.
“If Parliament feels the provision should be taken out, then Parliament should take the call. Whenever, something like this happens parliament wants courts to look into the issue,” the court said. Swamy demanded the matter be sent to a larger bench, which the court declined.
In her petition Pillai contended the law is being used to stifle even bonafide criticism of corporate houses indulging in violation of environmental laws. The petition stated the right to file defamation case against individuals should not be made available to private companies.
