Madras High Court slaps ₹25 lakh fine on magazine for false claim that DMK leader spoke against Rahul Gandhi

The Madras High Court on Tuesday has directed the Editor, Publisher, and Printer of the Tamil magazine Junior Vikatan to pay ₹25 lakhs as compensation to Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader TR Baalu for publishing defamatory and malicious content against him without verification [TR Balu v R Kannan & Ors]..In focus was an article published by the bi-weekly magazine in December 2013, in which Baalu was alleged to have referred to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi as a "small boy" during a closed-door meeting of the DMK. Justice AA Nakkiran found that Junior Vikatan failed to provide any proof for such a claim. The judge noted that the DMK meeting referred to in the article was in-camera, with the the press being allowed in only at the beginning and end of the meet."The report has been prepared on the basis of personal knowledge and information gathered from other source without verifying the reports whether it is truth or not," the Court observed, while concluding that the article was defamatory..The Court further observed that while the press has the freedom to report news, it must be backed by solid proof."In the event of enjoying the freedom of press, they have all the liberty to publish the news to bring out to the people with the solid proof and they should not tarnish the image and reputation of a person without verifying the veracity of the news and confirming the same," the judge said in the February 4 ruling. The Court added that being a renowned magazine that has wide circulation, Junior Vikatan should have been much more cautious before publishing such news. "They (Junior Vikatan's editor, printer and publisher) cannot take the privilege to tarnish the image and reputation of the Plaintiff (Baalu) amongst the minds of the public while the plaintiff held in various posts," the Court said. .Press should not tarnish the image and reputation of a person without verifying the veracity of the news.Madras High Court.Baalu had sought ₹1 crore as compensation from Junior Vikatan over certain reports published by the bi-weekly magazine.One such report was from March 28, 2012. Baalu contended that under the pretext of answering a reader’s question, it was alleged in the magazine that Baalu had unfairly benefited from the Sethu Samuthiram project. Baalu clarified that the project, launched in 2005 while he was the Union Minister for Shipping, Road Transport, and Highways, had been stalled due to pending court cases..He added that despite a legal warning, the magazine again published defamatory content on December 22, 2013, falsely accusing Baalu of calling Congress leader Rahul Gandhi a "small child" at a DMK meeting and questioning his leadership. Baalu denied making any such comment at the meeting and accused the magazine of damaging his reputation. .The DMK leader proceeded to sue the magazine for defamation in 2014. Baalu argued that Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution includes the right to a dignified life. He added that his family were not public figures and did not deserve to be subjected to defamation.He sought orders to stop the magazine from publishing or circulating any defamatory news about him or his family..Junior Vikatan's editor, publisher and printer denied any malicious intent and maintained that the articles were not defamatory. They argued that no defamation suit could be filed in respect of the first March 2012 article, since such a claim was time-barred. They added that Baalu had failed to prove any harm to his reputation from the second article. Further, it was contended that several other newspapers and magazines had carried the same news item..After hearing rival contentions, the Court concluded that the 2013 article was defamatory and malicious, particularly since Junior Vikatan's witness admitted that the report was source-based. The Court opined that this was not sufficient to verify the accuracy of the information. The Court, proceeded to order the defendants (Junior Vikatan's editor, printer and publisher) to pay ₹25 lakhs as damages to Baalu within a month..However, the Court upheld the Junior Vikatan's argument that the no case would lie against the first March 2012 article as it was time-barred.The Court also declined to accede to a prayer by Baalu for a permanent injunction on future publications."The plaintiff cannot seek for permanent injunction for the future publications regarding the subject matter in the present suit," the Court said..Senior Advocate P Wilson appeared for TR Baalu. Advocate N Ramesh appeared for the defendants..[Read Judgment]