9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiff was developing a patent design of Central Electro Chemical Research Institute, Karaikudi and is using Titanium Substrate Insoluble Anodes thereby the pollution hazard has considerably reduced compared to mercury-coated anodes. Recently, they developed a method whereby they use Membrane Cell Technology which is a revolutionary concept in the Chlor Alkhali Industry particularly from the point of view of pollution control and energy conservation. They are the first caustic soda manufacturing company using this technology. Appreciating the plaintiffs strive towards the environmental and pollution control by using the latest technology, it was awarded the prestigious F.I.C.C.I. Award for outstanding contribution to the Environmental pollution control in the year 1989. Even the original U.S.A. Company which developed that technology gave a citation to the plaintiff for the successful operation of the Chloro Alkhalis Plant. Subsequently, many citations were made by various authorities. The plaintiff started the factory only after various authorities involved in the environmental preservation and pollution control had inspected the site and reports given by them. Further, Directorate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and had not experienced any problems. But the plaintiff was shocked to see the first issue of March, 1990 of the "Junior Vikatan" published by the second defendant in which the cover page contained the photograph of the plaintiffs caustic soda factory clearly showing the plaintiffs name with red skull and cross bones superimposed with the caption underneath, "Poison Gas Danger" and "Villagers are trembling". The inside story contained at page 16 in no uncertain terms categorises the plaintiff's factory as a major pollution hazard in the locality and indeed the cover photograph itself is self-explanatory. It also referred to the influence used by the industrial Family of Birla as if the plaintiff-company was connected with the Birla family. The plaintiff has nothing to do with the Birla Group of companies. The general tenor of the allegations in the article give no room for doubt in the minds of the people except to conclude that the plaintiff was a major environmental hazard at Kalapet. Even the box column, containing excerpts of interview with the plaintiffs President, was falsely reported and none of the denials made by the company were given d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amage caused to the plaintiff's reputation and goodwill is estimated at ₹ 15 lakhs. Therefore, the suit has been filed for recovery of ₹ 15 lakhs for damages and also for permanent injunction from making any defamatory allegation against the plaintiff as well as for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to publish and carry out a retraction of the defamatory allegation contained in the issue dated 7.3.1990. 6. In the written statement, the defendants have stated as follows: Plaint does not disclose any cause of action. The plaint does not show any particulars of damage. It is devoid of such particulars. The suit has been filed for collateral purposes of screening against the complaints of environmental pollution. The first defendant is a responsible publication in the field of championing the Cause of public and projecting public grievances wherever needed with a view to bring to the notice of the concerned authorities so that they will take remedial steps. The facts referred to in the publication are true and based on the information which the defendants had reasons to believe as true. The defendants are running the journal and publishing articles after due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s suit has been instituted only for the purpose of preventing a section of the Press from acting in a over vigilant manner. The weekly magazine, "Junior Vikatan" published the article in question with a caption, "Visha Vayu Bayangaram" based on the materials gathered personally by the reporters of the second defendant in and around Kalapet and also from several other persons affected due to pollution caused by the chemical industries in that area. The public at large complaining about the menacing health hazards they were facing due to pollution. The publication was not intended to defame any one nor is it motivated; but only because of the public particularly students and members of the University had agitated over the prevailing pollution of air and water. The statements published in the article were reasonable and true and was published only in the public interest. As a publisher championing public cause, the defendants own a duty to the public to draw the attention of the authorities. The publication arose because the concerned authorities were not taking action to prevent health hazard. The articles published can hardly said to be defamatory. The defendants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether the report published in the journal is defamatory or made in good faith or for espousing public Cause in due diligence without mala fide? 4) To what relief is the plaintiff entitled to? 8. Oral evidence was adduced by both sides. P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and D.W.1 was examined. Ex.A.1 to A.4 were marked; Exs B.1 to B.6 were marked. Though evidence was recorded, the counsel for plaintiff and the defendants submitted arguments only on legal aspects. Attention was not drawn to any of the evidence. The reason is that they have argued only on the point, "Whether the article is defamatory or not?." They are not interested in the quantum of damages; that may be granted. Therefore, the only issue for consideration is, Whether the impugned article is defamatory or not? Therefore, other issues are not considered, as they are not pressed. 9. Issue: The plaintiff's counsel referred to Halsbury's Law of England-4th Edition Profusely. He has referred to the following passage. 16. Falsity and malice: In an action for libel or slander, it is the practice to allege in the statement of claim that the words were published falsely and maliciously. However, the plai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing it because the prospects of material advantage outweigh the prospects of material loss. Relying on these passages, the counsel for plaintiff contended that the plaintiff need not prove falsity or malice; the onus is on the defendant to prove "Justification" that the publication, complained of were fair comment on a matter of public interest; 10. Mr. P.S. Raman, counsel for the plaintiff argued that if the plaintiff proves that the matter published is defamatory, it is for the defendants to prove that it was supported by truth and it is a fair comment in public interest. 11. On perusing Ex.A.1, the original publication, the cover page contains the colour photograph in which the storage tank of the plaintiff-company is seen. The name of the plaintiff-company is also clearly visible in the photograph. Apart from that, there is a symbol of two cross bones beneath a skull printed in red colour indicating danger to life. Just beneath the storage tank, there is a caption in Tamil, Visha Vayu Bayangaram" meaning "danger of poisonous gas" ending with a exclamation mark. Further beneath it is printed in a prominent manner in big letters, "Nadungi kondir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the wordings in the cover page itself. It is clearly stated that it is only a caution report. A reading of the article would show they are only public views expressed by the various people who were interviewed by the reporter. It gives only a picture as to what happened in and around the place and the views expressed by the Pondicherry university staff and the letter written by the Vice Chancellor of the University and so on. It also states that the Vice Chancellor Mr. K. Venkata Krishnan who has served earlier as the Director of the same plaintiff-company. The report also says, on hearing that, the reporter felt something, fishy". He has also published the photograph of the Vice-Chancellor in the report itself. Therefore, the reporter has not concealed anything. He has even stated that there appears to be something "fishy" that the Vice-Chancellor was earlier occupying the post of Director in the same plaintiff-company. Therefore, he has given only a true report as to what was informed to him and the reaction he had on hearing them. He has acted impartially; he has given a true account of the reaction of the people without any addition. He has also published the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncern; the source of information; the steps taken to verify the information; the status of the information; the urgency of the matter; whether comment had been sought from the plaintiff; whether the article contained the gist of the plaintiffs side of the story; the tone of the article; and the circumstances of the publication, including the timing. That list was not exhaustive, and the weight to be given to those and any other relevant factors would vary from case to case. ....... Above all, the Court should have particular regard to the importance of freedom of expression, and should be slow to conclude that a publication was not in the public interest, especially when the information was in the field of political discussion. Thus any lingering doubts should be resolved in favour of publication. Our Court had an occasion to deal with a similar matter in the case reported in the case of Ramaswamy v. Karunanidhi (1970 L.W. (Crl.) 245), wherein Justice Somasundaram held as follows: Thus, the plea of fair comment would not be sustained unless facts were proved which made it reasonable to make such a suggestion. Where base and sordid motives which are not warranted by the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case is that only in the public interest, only in order to bring certain facts to the notice of public at large and to the authorities, the publication was made; before making such publication, the defendants had taken all steps to verify the truth; also they have interviewed various persons in and around the locality; the article mostly contained the opinion and views of the persons who were interviewed and the publication only gives the true picture of the statements made by these persons. It is only a report as stated by the persons in and around that area. The reporter also published the views of the manager or the plaintiff-company. The personal opinion of the publisher did not find a place. Therefore, the article as such, cannot be said to be defamatory and hence, the suit is liable to be dismissed. 19. Counsel for the plaintiff argued that newspapers in the guise of exercising the freedom of press cannot public defamatory article as they do not get any licence to do so. In the article, the author specifically expressed his opinion which is not true. Therefore, their statements cannot even be justified by truth. Though the plaintiff does not attribute malice to the defendan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the author cautions the authorities and the people that they should be vigilant in order to avoid any mishap. It cannot be said that the article asserts that the villagers are trembling with fear. All that it conveys is, if poisonous gas escapes, there is a likelihood of danger to the lives of the people. 22. In the article published in the inner page, it begins with the words, "Kalapet next to Pondicherry is in danger of becoming a Bhopal." There is also a statement that due to the number of chemical factories in that area, the environment has become polluted and due to the poisonous gas mixing with the atmosphere, the lives of students, teachers and staff as well as the people are affected. Thereafter, it also contains the statements made by various persons and the interview of the Manager of the plaintiff-company. The statement of the Manager that the company was awarded by Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industries in appreciation of keeping the environmental pollution under control has also been published; it also said that each one is blaming the other, but everyone forgets that the people are in danger. "During the enquiry, when the reporter hears that the Vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ught from the concerned plaintiff; whether the article contains the gist of the plaintiffs version. 25. Bearing this in mind, if the article is perused, it will definitely fall within the ambit of qualified privilege. The article conforms to all these tests. The author has taken all these steps before publication. Therefore, the publication is entitled for qualified privilege. 26. The intention of the publication appears to call the attention of public to the issue, with the ultimate aim of protecting the public from even a remote chance of recurrence of the Bhopal tragedy. The publication may at the most amount to criticising the officials of their inaction in enforcing the pollution control and similar laws in force. Democracy cannot survive in the absence of freedom of speech; Freedom of speech cannot be exercised if criticising officers for their action, culminate in a decree of libel. The minimum guarantee of freedom of speech is an unconditional right to say what one feels about a public affair. Therefore, the Press has the unconditional right to criticise on a public affair; so long as there is no malice, it does not amount to libel. 27. In a country like ours, where most ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
