Dear sir,
I am a senior class one gazetted CG officer, Sir I am exploring for genuineness for filing a case of defamation. In brief the matter is that, one of my colleague has imposed a baseless and false charge of financial irregularities against me. This, he has mentioned in his mail, described in two three lines of the para (exact language of the text is mentioned below), along with text related to other matter. In fact this baseless charge, is for a work which has not gone even to tender stage. At present we have taken only budgetary offers for the proposed upgradation work, from the probable companies. As per the standard official procedure, when we receive budgetary offers, these offers are discussed thoroughly by an expert committee, before going to tender stage. This fellow, has also copied this mail to my superior and also to Head of institution. In fact this baseless blame is a deliberated reaction against the proposed departmental action against him, to transfer his duties to the other areas within the institution.
Following lines describes non ethical, objectionable language, which he has used in his mail
- "The proposed quotation taken by Sh. ------------. Supplier* charging Rs. ------ without offering costlier equipments".
- "I feel all above financial matters and many more matters may proceed to financial irregularities and officially incorrect. Because of it, I have brought it in your kind knowledge".
(*Here it is to be noted that for a budgetary quotation there is no supplier company is just a bidder)
Please suggest me, whether I can file a case of defamation against him. This person who has imposed false charge of financial irregularities, against me belongs to reserved category, where as I belongs to general category. Please also advise me, whether I have to take departmental permission for filing this case.
With best regards
If there is a controversy as to whether the material complained of is defamatory or not, the court will first have to decide, as a question of law, as to whether the said material is capable of being understood in a defamatory sense. If the court find it affirmative, it will then only proceed to determine whether said material is understood in a defamatory sense. Reputation has been used to denote the estimation in which a person is held by others, the character imputed to him in the community or the society to which he belongs. A person may not be possessing property but may be having good character and reputation. The defamatory imputation on character or any person, to be defamatory had to be proved by the prosecution to be such as may have directly or in the estimation of the others, lowered the moral or intellectual character of officer in respect of his conduct as a public officer or a person in respect to his conduct in the society. Therefore the existence of the reputation of a person and it’s fall thereof should be primarily be proved by the prosecution.In the offence related to defamation it is not necessary to prove that actual harm was caused, if words are prima facie defamatory it would be sufficient.
