The Port Blair circuit bench of the Calcutta High Court has directed a woman to pay ₹1 lakh to her husband for defamation after she published a baseless public notice in a local newspaper, falsely accusing him of remarriage.
Justice Supratim Bhattcharya held: Thus Smti Ananta has neither revealed the source of obtaining the information nor she has been able to name the girl with whom she has implicated her husband (Ramchander). From the aforementioned discussion it transpires that the notices were referred to the plaintiff that is Ramchander and the statements were published in a daily newspaper which is circulated in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Through the notices it is clear that the appellant/wife has admitted the fact that the notices were published targeting her husband, that is Ramchander and from the notices it also transpires that therein allegations were made as regards to second marriage by Ramchander in spite of having subsistence of first marriage. This according to a prudent man is nothing but a statement degrading the goodwill or reputation of a person.
Facts of the case
Ramachander, an Assistant Engineer (Electrical) with the Port Blair Municipal Council, and his wife Ananta, a Draughtsman with the APWD department under the Andaman & Nicobar Administration, Port Blair, were married on March 2, 1994. They have a son, born on January 24, 1996. However, their relationship worsened over time, prompting Ramachander to file Matrimonial Suit No. 27 of 2005 against Ananta on charges of cruelty and desertion.
The Trial Court had ruled in favor of the matrimonial suit, prompting the wife to file an appeal (FA 03 of 2008). A Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal, overturning the Trial Court’s judgment and decree for the dissolution of the marriage. During this time, the wife published notices in The Daily Telegram, a prominent newspaper on the island, on two occasions — December 3, 2008, and December 5, 2008 — falsely claiming that Ramachander was attempting to marry another woman.
In response to the published notices, the husband filed a defamation suit. The Trial Court dismissed his request for damages and compensation. However, the First Appellate Court ruled in his favor, granting damages, which led the wife to file the current appeal.
Court’s verdict
After considering the opposing arguments, the court noted that during cross-examination, the wife acknowledged she had no evidence to support her claim of her husband’s alleged illicit relationship. She further admitted that she did not even know the name of the woman he was supposedly planning to marry.
The wife also conceded that she had not revealed the identity of the person who allegedly informed her about her husband’s intended remarriage. Therefore, her testimony clearly indicated that she could neither identify the informant nor name the woman her husband was supposedly planning to marry. Regarding damages, the court emphasized that under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, every individual has the fundamental right to live with dignity.
In the present case, the wife issued notices on two separate occasions in a widely circulated daily newspaper on the island. She herself admitted that the publication was made without verifying the details with the alleged informant. Despite her best efforts, she was unable to gather any information about the identity of the woman she accused her husband, Ramachander, of being involved with.
“This according to a person of prudent thinking causes emotional distress to the person involving whom such news is circulated having no basis. Law of Torts does not have the power to put a person in incarceration but it has been empowered to award damages. To deter any person from spreading any baseless news defaming another person damages have been incorporated under the Law of Torts. Quantifying such amount of damages acts as a deterrent factor and nothing more than that and it is imposed to keep the society intact,” court noted while granting ₹1 Lakh as compensation.
