Criminal Defamation Case Over a Post, News Report or Message: Getting It Quashed, Defending It, or Filing One

What a criminal defamation case is, and how it differs from a civil suit

Defamation is both a crime and a civil wrong in India. The criminal offence is now in Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which replaced Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code from 1 July 2024. Anything published before that date is still prosecuted under the IPC sections, and the law is in substance the same. The Supreme Court upheld the validity of criminal defamation in Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016).

A criminal case is started by a private complaint before a magistrate, not by a police FIR, because defamation is a non-cognizable offence and only the person aggrieved can set the law in motion. The punishment under Section 356(2) BNS is simple imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both, or community service. In practice, prison sentences are uncommon, and most cases end in acquittal, a compromise or an apology. The real cost for the accused is the process: years of court dates in a magistrate's court, often in another city.

A civil suit is different. It is filed for damages and, more often than not, for an injunction to take content down, and it can be decided at the interim stage within days if the case is strong. Many complainants file both. If you want the post removed quickly, the civil route is usually the faster one, explained on our page on civil defamation suits and takedown of content. This page deals with the criminal complaint: how it starts, how it is defended, and when the Delhi High Court will end it.

The provisions you will see in the papers

What the complainant has to prove

The complainant must show four things. First, an imputation: a statement of fact or insinuation about him, not just rude language or general abuse. Calling someone a fool in a heated exchange is insulting; saying he took bribes or cheated his business partners is an imputation. Second, publication: the statement must have reached at least one person other than the complainant. A message sent only to the complainant, however offensive, is not defamation, though it may be another offence. Third, identification: readers must be able to tell that the statement refers to the complainant, even if he is not named. Fourth, the intention or knowledge that the statement would harm his reputation.

Explanation 4 to Section 356(1) says an imputation harms reputation only if it lowers the person's moral or intellectual character, his character in his caste or calling, or his credit, in the estimation of others. A company or association can be defamed. A collection of persons can complain if it is a definite, identifiable group; an imputation against a whole community or profession usually is not actionable by any one member of it. A statement about a dead person can be defamation if it would harm his reputation had he been alive and is hurtful to his family.

The complainant must also be the 'person aggrieved'. A relative or follower who is upset on someone else's behalf generally cannot file the complaint. When the accused reads the complaint, the first question is whether the person who filed it is the one the statement was actually about.

The exceptions: where a true or fair statement is protected

• Truth for the public good. A true imputation is not defamation if it was made or published for the public good. Truth alone is not enough; the accused must also show public good, which is a question of fact.
• Public conduct of public servants and public questions. An opinion expressed in good faith about how a public servant discharged public functions, or about anyone's conduct on a public question, is protected, as far as it concerns that conduct.
• Court reports and decided cases. A substantially true report of court proceedings, and an opinion in good faith on the merits of a decided case or the conduct of parties and witnesses in it, are protected.
• Public performances. Reviews of a book, film, performance or anything submitted to public judgment are protected when made in good faith and confined to the work.
• Complaints to authority. An accusation made in good faith to a person with lawful authority over the accused, such as a complaint to the police, a regulator or an employer, is protected. This exception covers many cases filed in retaliation for a police complaint.
• Protecting interests and cautions. An imputation made in good faith to protect one's own or another's interests, or a caution conveyed for the good of the person warned or the public, is protected. A warning to a business partner about a supplier's unpaid dues can fall here.
• Censure by a person in authority. A teacher, employer or other person in lawful authority who passes censure in good faith on someone under that authority is protected.

How a complaint moves through a Delhi magistrate's court

The complaint is filed before the Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate with territorial jurisdiction, in Delhi at one of the district court complexes such as Tis Hazari, Saket, Patiala House, Karkardooma, Rohini or Dwarka. The complainant and usually one or two witnesses are examined on oath. Under the BNSS, before taking cognizance, the magistrate must give the proposed accused a chance to be heard, so the first thing many accused persons receive now is a notice for that hearing, not a summons.

If the magistrate takes cognizance and finds sufficient ground, summons are issued under Section 227. Where the accused lives outside the magistrate's area, an inquiry under Section 225 must come first: the magistrate either inquires himself or directs an investigation, and only then decides whether to summon. Summoning a person who lives in another city without this inquiry is a defect the High Court takes seriously.

Defamation is tried as a summons case, because the maximum punishment is two years. There is no separate discharge stage of the kind found in warrant cases. When the accused appears, the substance of the accusation is explained to him under Section 274 BNSS (old Section 251 CrPC), and if he does not plead guilty, the complainant's evidence is recorded, the accused is examined, defence evidence may be led, and the magistrate decides. The accused can apply for exemption from personal appearance on most dates, which magistrates usually allow once he has appeared and furnished a bail bond. Defamation is bailable, so arrest is not a realistic worry if you appear when summoned.

The pre-cognizance hearing: the accused's first real chance

Under the old CrPC the accused had no say until he was summoned. The first proviso to Section 223 BNSS changed that for complaints filed after 1 July 2024: the magistrate cannot take cognizance without hearing the accused. In May 2026, in Parvinder Singh v. Enforcement Directorate, the Supreme Court held that this hearing is mandatory and that cognizance taken without it is bad. That case arose from a money-laundering complaint, and its application to private complaints is still being worked out by trial courts, so check the current position. But the direction of the law is clear.

Use this hearing properly. It is not a trial, and the magistrate will not weigh evidence in detail, but a short written reply with the full post or article, the context the complainant left out, and the legal reasons the complaint fails can stop a weak case before summons. Common points at this stage are that the statement was not about the complainant, that it was never published to a third person, that the complainant is not the person aggrieved, that the complaint is time-barred, or that it falls within an exception on the complainant's own documents.

When Advocate B.K. Singh prepares an accused for this hearing, he keeps the reply short and anchored to the complainant's own annexures. A long reply that argues truth and public good in detail invites the magistrate to say these are matters for trial.

When the Delhi High Court will quash a defamation complaint

If summons have been issued, the accused can challenge the summoning order. There are two routes: a revision before the Sessions Court or the High Court under Sections 438 to 442 BNSS, and a petition to quash under Section 528 BNSS before the High Court. Because the summoning order cannot be recalled by the magistrate who passed it, these are the main remedies. Our pages on stay of summons and trial proceedings and how to challenge a summoning order in a complaint case explain the procedure.

The High Court quashes defamation complaints on well-recognised grounds. The words, read as a whole and in context, do not carry any defamatory meaning. There is no publication to a third person. The complainant is not the person aggrieved, or is one of an indeterminate class. The summoning order shows no application of mind, which the Supreme Court in Pepsi Foods v. Special Judicial Magistrate (1998) said is required because summoning is a serious matter. The complaint is beyond the limitation period. Or the accused is a director, editor or employee arrayed only because of his position, with no specific role alleged; the Supreme Court in Sunil Bharti Mittal v. CBI (2015) held there is no vicarious criminal liability unless a statute provides for it.

The High Court is more cautious with exceptions. Whether a statement was true and for the public good, or made in good faith, usually needs evidence, so the court generally leaves it to trial. It will quash on an exception only where the exception applies plainly on the complainant's own material, for example where the alleged defamation is a complaint the accused made to the police or a regulator, or a fair report of a court order. A petition that asks the High Court to hold a mini-trial on truth tends to fail.

Social media posts, reposts, WhatsApp groups and news reports

Most defamation complaints today are about something online: a post on X or Facebook, a YouTube video, an Instagram story, a Google review, a message in a society or alumni WhatsApp group. The same law applies. Publication happens when the content is read by others, which on a public account is presumed, and in a group happens when members read it. In a 2024 case involving a well-known politician, the Delhi High Court held that reposting defamatory content can itself be publication and refused to quash the summons. So a forward or a repost is not automatically safe. Courts have generally held that a WhatsApp group admin is not responsible for what members post unless he takes part in it.

Journalists, editors and publishers face complaints over news reports and broadcasts. The reporter and the person who decided to publish are the usual accused. A chief editor, owner or managing director is not automatically liable; the complaint must show what role he played in the publication. Fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings, police statements and public records is protected by the exceptions, and an honest correction or clarification, published promptly, is relevant to good faith.

Online publication raises the question of where the complaint can be filed, because a post can be read anywhere. Complainants sometimes file in a city far from where the accused lives, to make the case as burdensome as possible. Courts have accepted that a complaint can be filed where the content was accessed and the reputation harmed, but they also look critically at forum shopping. Where several complaints over the same post are filed in different States, the Supreme Court can transfer or club them. Our guide on quashing a criminal defamation case over social media posts covers the online angle in more depth, and fake or manipulated content is dealt with on our page on deepfakes and personality rights.

Which court hears it, and why

The complaint itself is filed in the magistrate's court where the offence took place, which for defamation means where the statement was published or read. In Delhi that is the Metropolitan Magistrate of the district concerned. Complaints by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of public servants about their official conduct go to the Court of Session. Defamation cases against sitting or former MPs and MLAs are heard by the special courts for such cases at the Rouse Avenue court complex, described on our page on the Rouse Avenue court.

The Delhi High Court comes in when the accused challenges the summoning order or seeks quashing, or when a complainant challenges the dismissal of a complaint. These petitions go to the single judge hearing criminal miscellaneous petitions under the current roster. The High Court can stay the trial while it hears the petition, and an interim stay is often the first relief sought. If the complaint is pending outside Delhi, for example in Gurugram or Lucknow, the challenge goes to that State's High Court, not to Delhi. If the case is in a Delhi court and the accused wants it moved to another Delhi court for genuine reasons, the remedy is a transfer petition, explained on our page on transfer of a criminal or matrimonial case.

If you have received a notice or summons: step by step

1. Read the complaint and annexures

   Get the full complaint, the list of witnesses and the documents relied on. Note the date of the alleged publication, the date of filing and the court. Check whether you have been sent a notice for a pre-cognizance hearing or a summons after cognizance.

2. Preserve, do not delete

   Do not delete the post in panic before taking advice, and do not post about the complaint. Take full screenshots of the post with its date, the comments and the thread around it, because context is often your defence. If a correction or clarification is sensible, it should be worded with care.

3. Respond at the pre-cognizance hearing

   If you have been given a hearing under Section 223 BNSS, file a short reply through counsel with the legal objections and the documents that show context. Ask that cognizance be declined.

4. Challenge the summoning order if issued

   If summons have been issued, consider a revision or a Section 528 petition in the Delhi High Court, with a prayer for stay of the trial. Act quickly: a revision has a limitation period, and delay weakens a request for stay.

5. Appear and seek exemption

   If there is no stay, appear on the date given, furnish a bail bond, and apply for exemption from personal appearance under Section 228 BNSS for later dates. NRIs and people living far away can ask to be represented by counsel and to appear by video where the court allows.

6. Prepare for trial or settlement

   If the case proceeds, the defence turns on cross-examining the complainant on context, publication and the exceptions. At any stage, the parties can compound the offence before the magistrate or seek quashing on settlement in the High Court.

If you are the one who was defamed

Start by preserving the evidence properly. Save the URL, take screenshots showing the date and the account, note who commented or shared, and record the post through a screen capture if it may be deleted. For use in court, electronic records need the certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and the person who took the screenshots should be ready to give evidence. A legal notice before filing is not required by law, but it often produces a deletion or an apology and shows the magistrate that you acted reasonably.

Then decide what you want. If the goal is to get the content taken down, a civil suit with an application for an interim injunction is faster and more direct. If the goal is to hold the person to account for a deliberate and damaging falsehood, a criminal complaint does that, at the cost of years of hearings. Both can be filed together. A criminal court can also order compensation to the complainant out of a fine under Section 395 BNSS (old Section 357 CrPC), though amounts are usually modest.

Watch the limitation. For defamation, the complaint must ordinarily be filed within three years. Do not file in a far-off court just to burden the other side; the complaint should be where you live or where the harm was felt, and courts look at that closely. And make sure you are really the person aggrieved. If the post attacks your company, the company through an authorised officer should complain, possibly with you as well if you are personally named.

Typical time and cost at each stage

Papers to collect

• The complaint, annexures, list of witnesses and the notice or summons received
• Full screenshots of the post, article, video or message, with dates, comments and the surrounding conversation
• Any legal notice sent or received before the complaint, and the reply
• Proof of the facts you said, if truth is part of the defence: documents, court orders, police complaints
• For journalists: the editorial record of who wrote, edited and approved the piece, and any correction published
• For directors: the company's records showing who managed the account or approved the content
• For complainants: the URL, screenshots, a Section 63 BSA certificate and names of people who read the content
• Order sheets of the magistrate's court, certified copies where a High Court petition is planned

Settlement, apology and compounding

Defamation is compoundable by the person defamed under Section 359 BNSS, without the court's permission. A written compromise can be filed before the magistrate at any stage, and the accused is acquitted. If the case is already in the High Court, the parties can ask for the complaint to be quashed on settlement. Our page on quashing on settlement explains how the High Court approaches compromises generally.

An apology is often the real subject of negotiation. Complainants usually want the content removed and a clarification published in the same place, with roughly the same reach. Accused persons usually want to avoid an admission of guilt. A carefully worded statement that withdraws the allegation, without conceding criminal intent, often settles both concerns. Courts, including the Delhi High Court and its mediation centre, regularly encourage this in defamation matters.

Settlement is not always the right course. A journalist who reported accurately on a matter of public importance, or a citizen whose complaint to an authority was turned into a defamation case, may decide to defend the case on principle. That is a legitimate choice, but it should be made knowing that the trial can take years.

Mistakes that make defamation cases worse

• Ignoring the notice. If you do not appear, the magistrate can issue a bailable warrant and, later, non-bailable warrants. A bailable offence becomes a much bigger problem.
• Posting about the complaint. Repeating the allegation, or attacking the complainant for filing the case, is a fresh publication and can lead to a second complaint.
• Deleting everything. Deleting the original post may look like an admission and can destroy the context you need. Take advice first, then remove or correct if that is the decision.
• Filing a reply that argues the whole case. At the pre-cognizance stage and in the High Court, legal objections on the face of the record work; a long factual defence invites the answer that it is a matter for trial.
• Complainants filing in a far-off court. A complaint filed where neither party lives, without an inquiry under Section 225, is vulnerable to quashing and to an order of costs.
• Missing limitation. Complainants who wait more than three years usually lose the right to prosecute, unless the delay can be explained under the law.

What to do this week

If you are the accused, get a copy of the complaint and annexures, take full screenshots of the content and its context, and do not post anything further about the complainant or the case. Check whether you have a notice for a pre-cognizance hearing or a summons after cognizance, and note the date. Find any document that shows why you made the statement: a complaint to an authority, an audit report, a court order, a news report you relied on. If the case is against a company, gather the record of who controlled the account.

If you are the person defamed, save the evidence with dates and URLs, get the Section 63 certificate prepared, and decide whether you need takedown, prosecution or both. If the content is part of a wider campaign of online harassment, our page on cyber crime cases at the Delhi High Court covers the offences that may apply alongside defamation. Advocate B.K. Singh often suggests a measured legal notice first, because it gives the other side a chance to remove the content and shows the court that the complaint was not filed in haste.

For advice on your papers, or for updates on how courts are applying the new BNSS procedure to defamation complaints, contact Advocate B.K. Singh.