BJD MP Pinaki Misra Pursues Legal Action Against Defamatory Remarks

The BJD MP Pinaki Misra has moved to the Delhi High Court and filed a case of defamation against advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai after he said that Jai Anant Dehrabhai has been calling him names like ‘Odia Babu’, ‘Dalal of Puri’, and ‘Canning Lane’.

OVERVIEW

As per the pleadings made by the BJD MP, Dehadrai had begun defaming his name after he let out various tweets around November 2023, wherein Dehadrai mentioned Pinaki Misra through pseudonyms such as “Canning Lane” and “Odia Babu” and implied that he was involved in some criminal activities.
Dehadrai leveled multiple accusations of bribery and corruption against Mahua Moitra and is dragging along Misra’s name as well, labeling him as “the MP from Orissa” and “a close associate of Mahua Moitra.”  Misra’s lawsuit contends that there has been a barrage of allegations not only against Moitra but also against individuals with whom he shares a personal connection. So he seeks not just an apology from Dehrabhai, but through this suit he also demands damages as well.
Through this suit, Pinaki Misra also seeks restraint to prevent the defendant from making further defamatory remarks. Additionally, he seeks the removal of such content from various platforms, including X, and news agencies such as PTI and ANI. The aforementioned news agencies have also been named as defendants in the lawsuit.
Regarding the same issue, Mr. Jai Anant Dehradrai posted a message on X and said that “Mr. Pinaki Misra has filed a defamation suit against me in the Delhi High Court, seeking an injunction to permanently silence me. I welcome it, but I will not stop fighting the good fight. Satyameva Jayate,”.

WHAT IS DEFAMATION?

Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code provides a comprehensive definition of defamation, encompassing various forms of communication such as spoken words, written words intended to be read, signs, or visible representations. It emphasizes the intent to harm or the knowledge that such imputation will harm the reputation of the person targeted.

But does that mean that no one can criticize as it also harms other’s reputation?

Criticism and defamation are mainly different in terms of their purpose and impact on reputation. While criticism entails voicing thoughts or conclusions, frequently in a negative light, defamation takes a step further by committing falsehoods or impugning the character of another person. Recalling the definition from Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, defamation necessitates either the knowledge or the desire to cause harm to the target’s reputation. On the other hand, constructive criticism does not always have to be directed at harming the reputation of the target; it can be based on facts or well-reasoned beliefs.

In essence, criticism is a form of expression that contributes to public discourse and debate, while defamation involves making false statements or imputations with the specific purpose of damaging someone’s reputation.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International