The Delhi High Court has reaffirmed the pivotal role of press freedom in a democratic society, emphasizing that journalists must have the liberty to exercise their professional judgment without undue legal consequences. This observation was made by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav while dismissing a defamation claim against a media firm by a company over an article published on an internet magazine.
The court’s ruling highlighted the essential balance between the freedom of expression and an individual’s right to reputation. The plaintiffs had alleged that the article, which critiqued the work culture within their company, was defamatory and damaged their reputation. However, Justice Kaurav noted that the company had sought an injunction over a year after the article’s publication, questioning the urgency of their claim.
In his judgment, Justice Kaurav pointed out that the absence of prima facie evidence of malice, reckless disregard for the truth, or gross negligence meant that the article could not be held to an unreasonably high standard of accuracy. He stated, “From a journalistic point of view, the article does not appear to fall in the category of reckless reporting and is claimed to be source-based, context-specific reporting.”
The court further elaborated on the principles governing defamation proceedings, where the doctrine of substantial truth should prevail over minor inaccuracies, provided the essence of the publication remains truthful. The order from March 24 underlined that to inhibit such publications would “disturb the equilibrium” necessary to maintain the balance between free speech and the right to reputation, potentially favoring the latter unjustifiably.
