Drawing a clear line between criticism and defamation, a Bengaluru court has sentenced a man to six months’ imprisonment for writing derogatory letters against the Karnataka Upa Lokayukta, holding that freedom of speech cannot be used to defame others, especially constitutional institutions.
The LXVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Rashmi M was hearing a case filed by the registrar of the Karnataka Lokayukta against one G Shankar under Section 17(2) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. Shankar was accused of deliberately making defamatory and derogatory statements against the then Upa Lokayukta in a series of letters written after his complaint relating to temple shops in Ballari was closed.
“Under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, the Right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed is paramount. At the same time, no person can, in the name of freedom of speech and expression, defame others. Protection of reputation is a fundamental right of every individual and institution. The accused has used very cheap, derogatory remarks questioning the very integrity and dignity of the office of Lokayukta. The said letters are evidently not written in good faith by the accused,” the court said on July 10.
The prosecution arose from a dispute dating back to 2015, when Shankar approached the Karnataka Lokayukta alleging irregularities in the eviction of shopkeepers from the Sree Nageshwara Swamy Temple premises in Ballari. Dissatisfied after the Lokayukta closed his complaint, he allegedly launched a series of written attacks on the institution, eventually leading to criminal prosecution and conviction.
Complaint over temple shops
According to the prosecution, Shankar filed a complaint before the Karnataka Lokayukta on February 19, 2015, claiming to represent members of the public and shopkeepers associated with the Sree Nageshwara Swamy Temple in Ballari.
He alleged that officials of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Institutions Department had illegally evicted temple shop tenants under the pretext of road widening.
During the inquiry, the assistant commissioner informed the Lokayukta that the eviction had been undertaken to facilitate construction of a commercial complex to increase the temple’s income. However, the proposal was later affected after the Ballari City Municipal Corporation rejected it because the road had to be widened from 15 metres to 18 metres. Officials also reported that encroachments highlighted by Shankar had been removed.
Story continues below this ad
After examining the material, the Lokayukta’s scrutiny officer recommended closure of the complaint, observing that the eviction had been carried out according to law and that Shankar had alternative remedies under the Karnataka Rent Act and the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act. The Upa Lokayukta accepted the recommendation and closed the proceedings.
Letters sparked prosecution
The court noted that after learning about the closure of his complaint, Shankar addressed a letter dated September 3, 2022, to the Upa Lokayukta expressing dissatisfaction with the decision. He sent another letter to the Lokayukta on February 27, 2023, and later replied to a show-cause notice on May 11, 2023.
According to the prosecution, all three communications contained defamatory and derogatory allegations against the Upa Lokayukta and the Lokayukta institution. Copies of the September 2022 letter were also forwarded to the Governor of Karnataka and members of the public.
Following these communications, the Lokayukta issued a show-cause notice asking Shankar why action should not be initiated under Section 17 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act. His reply allegedly repeated the same allegations, prompting the Lokayukta to grant sanction for prosecution.
Story continues below this ad
Defence rejected
During the trial, the defence argued that the letters merely reflected the accused’s frustration over the manner in which his grievance had been handled. It also contended that the communications had not been published in newspapers or circulated publicly and therefore could not amount to defamation.
The court rejected the argument, observing that Section 17(2) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act covers statements made by words spoken or intended to be read if they are calculated to bring the Lokayukta or Upa Lokayukta into disrepute.
‘Defamatory, derogatory remarks’
- The accused had intentionally made defamatory and derogatory remarks with a sole intention to bring to disrepute the institution of Lokayukta in the eyes of the general public.
- The Lokayukta and Upalokayukta are not just persons but an institution.
- These institutions are established with the sole intention to attend to the needs of the public in its drive against corruption and other evils which are affecting the social and economic welfare of the society at large.
- The Upalokayukta is a retired judge of the High Court of Karnataka known for his integrity, honesty and hard work.
- The words and allegations made in the letters have the capability to cause severe damage to the reputation to Upalokayuktha.
- Especially, it has the potential to impact the integrity of an individual or institution in a far-reaching and enduring manner.
- As aptly stated by Bulwer Lytton, “The Pen is mightier than the sword”.
- Given its vast reach, the said letters were not just addressed to Upalokayuktha and Lokayukta.
- Those were forwarded to the Governor of the state and the public at large, which goes to show that the sole intention of the accused was to circulate the letters.
Six months’ jail and fine
After convicting Shankar under Section 17(2) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, the court sentenced him to six months’ simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.5,000. In default of payment of the fine, he will have to undergo an additional two months’ simple imprisonment.
The court also directed that the accused would be entitled to the benefit of set-off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the period already spent in judicial custody.
