Supreme Court Hints at End to Criminal Defamation: ‘Time to Decriminalise All This’ in Long-Running JNU Case
In a sharp pivot from its 2016 verdict upholding the law, a bench led by Justice Sundresh questions prolonged misuse of defamation charges against media, issues notice to complainant as The Wire challenges fresh summons
New Delhi, September 22, 2025: The Supreme Court of India on Monday signalled a potential overhaul of the country’s colonial-era criminal defamation provisions, orally observing that “it’s time to decriminalise all this” while hearing a decade-old case against news portal The Wire. The remark, made by Justice M.M. Sundresh during proceedings on a petition by the Foundation for Independent Journalism (which operates The Wire) and journalist Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprashasta, highlights growing judicial unease over the law’s frequent invocation to settle personal and political scores, potentially paving the way for reforms that could limit its scope to civil remedies.
The case traces back to a 2016 article by Mahaprashasta titled “Dossier Calls JNU ‘Den of Organised Sex Racket’; Students, Professors Allege Hate Campaign,” which reported on an anonymous dossier submitted to the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) administration. The piece alleged that the document—purportedly accusing faculty of fostering a “decadent culture” through support for separatist activities—was compiled under the guidance of then-professor Amita Singh, damaging her reputation and prompting her to file a criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). A Delhi magistrate summoned the duo in 2017, only for the Delhi High Court to quash it in 2023. The Supreme Court, in a July 2024 order by Justices Sundresh and Arvind Kumar, reversed that decision, remanding the matter for the magistrate to scrutinise the publication before reissuing summons. The lower court complied in January 2025, a move upheld by the High Court in May, leading to the current appeal.
During Monday’s hearing, alongside Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Justice Sundresh expressed frustration at the protracted litigation, questioning, “How long will you go on dragging these cases?” Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal drew parallels to ongoing defamation appeals by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, urging the bench to address the law’s chilling effect on free speech. The court issued notice to Singh, staying further proceedings and listing the matter for detailed arguments, while flagging the need to balance reputation protection under Article 21 with expression rights under Article 19(1)(a).
This oral observation marks a stark departure from the Supreme Court’s 2016 landmark ruling in Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, where a Constitution Bench—upholding Sections 499, 500 IPC and 199 CrPC—deemed criminal defamation a “reasonable restriction” on speech, essential for safeguarding individual honour as part of the right to life. The 2016 judgment rejected claims of a “chilling effect,” arguing that reputational harm serves broader social interests without disproportionately curbing freedoms. Critics, including media bodies and free speech advocates, have long contested this, pointing to over 200 defamation cases annually, many targeting journalists and opposition figures.
Under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), effective July 2024, defamation now falls under Section 356, retaining the two-year imprisonment or fine penalty. Recent judicial trends, such as the March 2025 Imran Pratapgarhi verdict emphasising a “reasonable person” standard for defamatory content and an August 2025 dismissal of a Karnataka minister’s appeal against a BJP MLA, suggest evolving scrutiny. Legal experts view Monday’s comments as a catalyst for revisiting the law, potentially aligning India with global democracies like the UK and US, where defamation is largely civil. “This could signal the end of weaponised prosecutions,” said a senior advocate familiar with the case, speaking anonymously.
As the debate intensifies amid rising press freedom concerns—India ranks 159th on the 2025 World Press Freedom Index—the ruling could reshape accountability mechanisms, urging lawmakers to prioritise civil suits over criminal intimidation.
