BNS Section 356: Defamation

Definition of BNS Section 356

Section 356 of BNS 2023 States:

(1) Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes in any manner, any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.

Exception 1.—It is not defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person, if it be for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.
Exception 2.—It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, or respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further
Exception 3.—It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatsoever respecting the conduct of any person touching any public question, and respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further
Exception 4.––It is not defamation to publish a substantially true report of the proceedings of a Court, or of the result of any such proceedings
Exception 5.—It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the merits of any case, civil or criminal, which has been decided by a Court, or respecting the conduct of any person as a party, witness or agent, in any such case, or respecting the character of such person, as far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further
Exception 6.—It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion respecting the merits of any performance which its author has submitted to the judgment of the public, or respecting the character of the author so far as his character appears in such performance, and no further
Exception 7.—It is not defamation in a person having over another any authority, either conferred by law or arising out of a lawful contract made with that other, to pass in good faith any censure on the conduct of that other in matters to which such lawful authority relates
Exception 8.—It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with respect to the subject-matter of accusation
Exception 9.— It is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another provided that the imputation be made in good faith for the protection of the interests of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good.
Exception 10.— It is not defamation to convey a caution, in good faith, to one person against another, provided that such caution be intended for the good of the person to whom it is conveyed, or of some person in whom that person is interested, or for the public good.

(2) Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both, or with community service.

(3) Whoever prints or engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

(4) Whoever sells or offers for sale any printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter, knowing that it contains such matter, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Explanation and Illustration of BNS Section 356

Section 356 holds dignity and respect to be the bedrock of society. It tries to maintain the delicate balance between the freedom of speech and the necessity of preventing abuse that would have an adverse effect on another's standing, reiterating the notion that reputation is a fundamental right that requires legal protection. Here is an elaborate explanation:

Explanations:

It is defamation to make imputations concerning a dead person if such imputations would have prejudiced their credit when living and are intended to wound the feelings of their relatives or next of kin
Defamation includes imputations made against a company, association or body of persons as a body
An imputation made ironically or as a matter of course may be held to be defamation
A statement is held to be defamatory if it tends to lower a person's moral, intellectual, caste, professional, or credit standing in the estimation of others or to create an impression that the person's body is in a state of disgraceful or loathsome condition.

Illustrations:

A says, 'Z is honest; he never stole B's watch,' but by saying this, A is actually implying that Z did steal the watch. This could be considered defamation, unless there's a valid reason for saying it.

If A points to Z when asked who stole B's watch, suggesting Z is guilty, this could also be defamation unless there's an exception.

If A draws a picture showing Z stealing B's watch to make people believe Z is guilty, it could be defamation too, unless there's an exception.

However, it would not be defamation if A expresses his honest opinion on Z's action in some public situation. For instance, A can express opinions on Z's participation in a public petition, meeting, or voting for a candidate as long as A is doing it in good faith.

Some people are allowed to criticize others in some situations as long as it's done honestly and in good faith. These people include:

A judge criticising a witness or court officer
A department head criticizing someone under their supervision
A parent criticizing a child in front of others
A teacher criticizing a student in front of other students
A boss criticizing a worker for bad performance
A bank manager criticizing the cashier in front of others

For example, if A says, 'I think Z's evidence in court is so contradictory that he must be stupid or dishonest,' A is within the rules as long as A is just giving an opinion about Z's actions in the trial, not about Z as a person outside of that context.

But if A says, 'I do not believe Z's testimony because I know that he is a liar,' then A is not within the exception because this opinion concerns Z's character, not what he did in this trial.

If A, a shopkeeper, says to B, 'Don't sell to Z unless he pays in cash because I don't trust him,' A is permitted to say this if it's done to protect A's business, provided that it's done in good faith.

If A is a magistrate and he makes a report to some higher authority where he criticizes the character of Z, such a thing is permissible if the criticism is made in good faith for public good.

If one publishes a book, speech, or performance before the public, he exposes it to public criticism. If A publishes, 'Z's book is silly; he must be a weak man,' A may well say this, if the judgment is based only on Z's book, but upon no other evidence of Z's character.

But if A says, 'Z's book is foolish and indecent because he's a weak man and a libertine,' A isn't allowed to say this because it's based on an opinion about Z's character, not the book itself.

Why Choose Vakilsearch for Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)?

Understanding the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) laws can be confusing, but Vakilsearch is here to make it easy for you. Here’s why we’re the right choice:

• Expert Help: Our lawyers know the BNS sections inside out and can guide you through how the new laws apply to you or your business.
• Simple and Clear: We break down all the legal jargons into simple language, so you can easily understand what steps to take.
• Personalised Service: Whether you need help with specific BNS sections for women or other legal concerns, we provide advice and support tailored to your situation.
• Experienced Team: We’ve helped thousands of clients understand about the old IPC sections, and now we’re ready to help you transition smoothly to the new BNS laws.