Libel and Slander

In one line

Libel is defamation in a permanent form, slander is defamation in a transient form, and in India the difference matters far less than in England.

In the wording a student can write in an exam: libel is the publication of a defamatory statement in some permanent form, such as writing, printing, a picture, an effigy or a broadcast, while slander is its publication in a transient form, such as spoken words or gestures; in English law libel is actionable per se and is also a crime, while slander is actionable only on proof of special damage except in four cases; in India the distinction has largely not been followed, and the better view, taken by several High Courts, is that slander too is actionable without proof of special damage.

The English distinction

Libel is in permanent form: writing, print, a picture, a statue, an effigy, a film, and by statute in England a broadcast. It is actionable per se and is also a crime.

Slander is in transient form: spoken words, gestures, sign language. It is actionable only on proof of special damage, which means actual pecuniary loss, and it is not ordinarily a crime.

Special damage means some material or temporal loss, such as the loss of employment, of custom, or of the hospitality of friends. Mere loss of reputation or hurt feelings is not special damage.

The four exceptions, where slander is actionable per se

1. Imputation of a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment.

2. Imputation of a contagious or infectious disease which would cause the plaintiff to be shunned.

3. Imputation of unfitness, dishonesty or incompetence in an office, profession, calling, trade or business carried on by the plaintiff.

4. Imputation of unchastity or adultery to a woman or girl, made actionable in England by statute.

Why the distinction was drawn, and why it is criticised

The historical reasons were the permanence of the written word, the deliberation involved in writing, and the wider circulation print achieves.

The criticisms are that a spoken word on television now reaches more people than a printed one, that a defamatory remark may be repeated indefinitely, and that the line between permanent and transient has become arbitrary. A defamatory statement read aloud from a script is slander; the script itself is libel.

The Indian position

This is the paragraph MU is asking for.

Indian law has not adopted the English distinction in its full form. The better view, taken by several High Courts, is that in India slander is also actionable without proof of special damage, and the reasons given are these.

The law came here as justice, equity and good conscience. As chapter [Tort in India] explains, English rules apply only so far as they suit Indian conditions, and a rule that leaves a poor plaintiff without a remedy because he cannot prove a rupee of loss does not.