Defamation
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with defamation. Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes 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 ca The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes 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.
Explanation 1.-It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the fellings of his family or other near relatives.
Explanation 2.-It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such.
Explanation 3.-An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation.
Explanation 4.-No imputation is said to harm a person's reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the
estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a lothsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.
Illustrations
(a) A says-"Z is an honest man; he never stole B's watch", intending to cause it to be believed that Z did steal B's watch. This is defamation, unless it fall within one of the exceptions.
(b) A is asked who stole B's watch. A points to Z, intending to cause it to be believed that Z stole B's watch. This is defamation, unless it fall within one of the exceptions.
(c) A draws a picture of Z running away with B's watch, intending it to be believed that Z stole B's watch. This is defamation, unless it fall within one of the exceptions.
First Exception.-Imputation of truth which public good requires to be made or published.- 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.
Second Exception.-Public conduct of public servants.-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.
Third Exception.-Conduct of any person touching any public question. -It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever 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.
Illustration
It is not defamation in A to express in good faith any opinion whatever resepting Z's conduct in petitioning Government on a public question, in signing a requisition for a meeting on a public question, in presiding or attending at such meeting, in forming or joining any society which invites the public support, in voting or canvassing for a particular candidate for any situation in the efficient discharge of the duties of which the public is interested.
Fourth Exception.-Publication of reports of proceedings of courts- It is not defamation to publish a substantially true report of the proceedings of a Court of Justice, or of the result of any such proceedings.
Explanation.-A Justice of the Peace or other officer holding an enquiry in open Court preliminary to a trial in a Court of Justice, is a Court within the meaning of the above section.
Fifth Exception.-Merits of case decided in Court or conduct of witnesses and others concerned. 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 of Justice, 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.
Illustrations
(a) A says-"I think Z's evidence on that trial is so contradictory that he must be stupid or dishonest." A is within this exception if he says this in good faith, inasmuch as the opinion which he expresses respects Z's character as it appears in Z's conduct as a witness, and no farther.
(b) But if A says-"I do not believe what Z asserted at that trial because I know him to be a man without veracity"; A is not within this exception, inasmuch as the opinion which expresses of Z's character, is an opinion not founded on Z's conduct as a witness.
Sixth Exception.-Merits of public performance.-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 farther.
Explanation.-A performance may be submitted to the judgment of the public expressly or by acts on the part of the author which imply such submission to the judgment of the public.
Illustrations
(a) A person who publishes a book, submits that book to the judgment of the public.
(b) A person who makes a speech in public, submits that speech to the judgment of the public.
(c) An actor or singer who appears on a public stage, submits his acting or singing to the judgment of the public.
(d) A says of a book published by Z-"Z's book is foolish; Z must be a weak man. Z's book is indecent; Z must be a man of impure mind." A is within the exception, if he says this in good faith, inasmuch as the opinion which he expresses of Z respects Z's character only so far as it appears in Z's book, and no further.
(e) But if A says-"I am not surprised that Z's book is foolish and indecent, for he is a weak man and a libertine." A is not within this exception, inasmuch as the opinion which he expresses of Z's character is an opinion not founded on Z's book.
Seventh Exception.-Censure passed in good faith by person having lawful authority over another.-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.
Illustration
A Judge censuring in good faith the conduct of a witness, or of an officer of the Court; a head of a department censuring in good faith those who are under his orders; a parent censuring in good faith
a child in the presence of other children; a schoolmaster, whose authority is derived from a parent, censuring in good faith a pupil in the presence of other pupils; a master censuring a servant in good faith for remissness in service; a banker censuring in good faith the cashier of his bank for the conduct of such cashier as such cashier- are within this exception.
Eighth Exception.-Accusation preferred in good faith to authorised person.-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.
Illustration
If A in good faith accuses Z before a Magistrate; if A in good faith complains of the conduct of Z, a servant, to Z's master;if A in good faith complains of the conduct of Z, a child, to Z's father-A is within this exception.
Ninth Exception.-Imputation made in good faith by person for protection of his or other's interests.-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 interest of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good.
Illustrations
(a) A, a shopkeeper, says to B, who manages his business-"Sell nothing to Z unless he pays you ready money, for I have no opinion of his honesty." A is within the exception, if he has made this imputation on Z in good faith for the protection of his own interests.
(b) A, a Magistrate, in making a report to his own superior officer, casts an imputation on the character of Z. Here, if the imputation is made in good faith, and for the public good, A is within the exception.
Tenth Exception.-Caution intended for good of person to whom conveyed or for public good.- 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.
Section 499, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 356 Defamation Text carried over almost unchanged 94%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Jeffrey J. Diermeier vs State of West Bengal
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly, carefully, and cautiously only in the rarest of rare cases where a clear case for quashing is made out. When allegations in a defamation complaint raise disputed questions of fact regarding whether the accused acted in good faith and for public good (as required to establish protection under the Tenth Exception to Section 499 IPC), such factual determinations cannot be made at the pre-trial, complaint-quashing stage without evidence, and the complaint cannot be quashed merely because defenses are pleaded. The determination of good faith and public good in defamation cases is a question of fact and evidence, requiring consideration of the nature of imputation, circumstances of its making, and status of the parties involved, which must be examined during trial.
On this section: Definition of defamation - requires imputation with intention of harming or knowing or having reason to believe it will harm reputation. Court clarified that harm to reputation is the essence of defamation offense.
-
Mohammed Abdulla Khan vs Prakash K
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A newspaper owner can be prosecuted for defamatory content published in the newspaper under Sections 500, 501, and 502 IPC if the elements of the offence are satisfied. The question of whether the respondent committed the acts constituting the offence with the requisite intention or knowledge cannot be determined at the stage of cognizance without examining evidence. The High Court erred in quashing the complaint against the newspaper owner under Section 482 CrPC without examining the substantive question of criminal liability. The trial court must proceed with the case and examine the evidence to determine the guilt of the respondent.
On this section: Defines defamation as making or publishing any imputation concerning any person with intention or knowledge that it will harm reputation. The court analyzed the essential elements of defamation including the requirement of publication to persons other than the person defamed.
-
Ram Swarup vs Mohd. Javed Razack
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A Metropolitan Magistrate may take cognizance of a defamation complaint based on a prima facie case established through examination of the complaint and the complainant on oath, without mandatory referral to police under Section 156(3) CrPC. Furthermore, a complainant who is himself addressed with defamatory words has the legal standing to lodge a complaint under Section 199 CrPC, regardless of whether defamatory words were also used against a third party. The Magistrate's discretionary exercise of cognizance, once made based on prima facie case establishment, cannot be subsequently challenged on procedural grounds.
On this section: Definition and elements of defamation; the court examined whether the words used were defamatory in nature and whether they injured the reputation of the complainant
-
Satbir vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Statements made in good faith regarding the character and conduct of a person in the context of an official proceeding (such as objections invited by a government official during a selection process) are protected under the 5th Exception to Section 499 IPC and do not constitute defamation, even if the statements are not made in the context of a decided court case.
On this section: Definition of defamation - the court examined whether the affidavit filed by the accused constituted defamation under this section
-
Ajay Walia vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Fair criticism of public figures and their conduct in matters of public interest, made in good faith and without defamatory intent, is protected under the exceptions to defamation law (Sections 499 IPC) and the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution). An FIR for defamation cannot be validly registered when the complainant is not the defamed person. Mere dissatisfaction or disagreement with a statement does not constitute promoting enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different classes under Section 505(2) IPC. When allegations in an FIR, even if taken at face value, do not prima facie constitute the necessary ingredients of an offence, the FIR and all consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C.
On this section: Definition of defamation. The Court analyzed whether the post constituted defamation by examining whether it made an imputation concerning a person intending to harm or knowing that it would harm their reputation. The Court found that the post was fair criticism of public conduct and fell within the exceptions to defamation.
-
Basangouda vs Durgappa
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a criminal complaint alleges defamatory statements made by one accused but does not contain specific allegations against another accused, and the sworn statement of the complainant does not establish that the second accused made any defamatory statements (but only that he drafted the complaint), the prosecution of the second accused would constitute abuse of process of law and the proceedings should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC for lack of prima facie allegations.
On this section: Definition of defamation - making imputations concerning any person with intent to harm reputation or knowing it is likely to harm reputation
-
Sri Uday S/o Ramanath Naik vs Sri Durgappa S/o Durgappa Machennavar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
At the preliminary stage of cognizance under Section 482 CrPC, when the sworn statement of the complainant and documents produced establish a prima facie case of defamation by clearly stating that the accused made derogatory and libellous statements that lowered the complainant's reputation, the High Court cannot quash the proceedings. Questions of good faith, the circumstances under which imputations were made, the intention of the accused, and whether the imputations were made with due care and attention are matters of evidence and questions of fact to be examined during trial based on evidence, not at the preliminary stage. The accused cannot dispute questions of fact at the preliminary stage under Section 482 CrPC.
On this section: Definition of defamation - making or publishing any imputation concerning any person intending to harm or knowing it is likely to harm his reputation
-
H.d.f.c. Bank Ltd. through Mr. Jayanta Banerjee& ANR. vs State of Bihar& ANR.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Indian Penal Code does not contemplate vicarious liability on the part of a party who is not directly charged for commission of an offence. When a dispute arises from employment termination and the complainant seeks to convert it into a criminal case by making allegations of defamation and fraud against corporate officials without establishing their direct personal involvement in the alleged wrongdoing, such FIR constitutes malicious prosecution and abuse of process of law and is liable to be quashed. The availability of civil remedies for employment disputes precludes the invocation of criminal law for the same cause of action.
On this section: Cited in FIR for defamation; court examined whether statements to RBI and NSE constituted defamation
-
Anand Singh vs Prem Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The bar of limitation prescribed under Section 468 CrPC is mandatory and applies to defamation offences. A court cannot take cognizance of a defamation offence after the expiry of three years from the date of the offence. The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of this limitation bar, and the revisional court erred in ignoring this bar and passing a summoning order. Additionally, a revisional court must issue notice to the petitioner before passing an adverse order, as required by the principles of natural justice.
On this section: Definition of defamation; the court examined whether allegations made to police constitute defamation and discussed Exception 8 to this section
-
The Public Prosecutor, Principal District and Sessions Judge Court, Guntur vs Konidela Pawan Kalyan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Village Volunteers appointed on a time-phrase basis do not fall under the definition of 'Public Servant' in Section 21 IPC, and general criticism of a policy or system does not constitute criminal defamation if it lacks specific intent to harm individuals and is protected by Article 19(1)(a).
On this section: Definition of Defamation; used to assess if the speech was derogatory.
-
Varusanadu PS vs 1. Tamilarasan and 2 others
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
False and defamatory statements made with intent to harm reputation constitute criminal defamation under Section 490 IPC, and the accused is liable for conviction when the prosecution establishes these elements beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Definition of defamation - Likely considered for determining whether statements meet the legal definition of defamatory content and whether any exceptions apply.
-
Surekha Vivek Kate vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When there is prima facie evidence of a systematic financial scam involving multiple victims and substantial monetary transactions, the necessity of custodial interrogation outweighs the right to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
On this section: Defamation.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… On 19.07.2019, Respondent No.1 herein filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C' ) against six individuals, on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan MagistrateI, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi, alleging commission of the offences under Sections 499 and 500 read with Sections 34 and 35 of the Indian Penal Code ( hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' ). The case of Respondent No.1 in his complaint was, that he has been the Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi since February 2015; that on 01.07.2019, Shri Manoj Tiwari, ( A1 who is the appellant in one of these appeals ) …
-
… In the book The Law of Defamation, by Richard O'Sullivan, QC and Ronald Brown, 'defamation' is defined as a false statement of which the tendency is to disparage the good name or reputation of another person. 23. As per Section 499, Indian Penal Code, offence of defamation consists of three essential ingredients namely: (i) Making or publishing any imputation concerning any person. (ii) Such imputation must have been made by words either written or spoken or by visible representation. (iii) Such imputation must be made with the intention to …
-
… Reference in this regard may be further made to M.A Rumugam v. Kittu @ Krishnamoorthy, (2009) 1 SCC 101 , wherein it was held that for the purpose of bringing a case within the purview of the Eighth and the Ninth Exception appended to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, it would be necessary for the appellant to prove good faith for the protection of the interests of the person making it or of any other person or for the public good. It was further emphasized that the law is well settled that those who plead exception must prove it. 22. It may also be …
Questions about Section 499
What have the courts held on Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code?
Jeffrey J. Diermeier vs State of West Bengal (14 May 2010) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Definition of defamation - requires imputation with intention of harming or knowing or having reason to believe it will harm reputation. Court clarified that harm to reputation is the essence of defamation offense. Another 11 judgments on this section are set out below, 3 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2005 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IPC 499, section 499 IPC, section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 499 and 500 and ipc 499 in bns. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 12 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Jeffrey J. Diermeier vs State of West Bengal (14 May 2010).
What should I read with Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 356 (Defamation), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 499, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 words
- 350. Criminal force667 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.