Client Can Be Prosecuted For His Lawyer's Defamatory Arguments: J&K&L High Court

The case at hand involved a petitioner who challenged the initiation of a defamation case against him. The petitioner, a Jaipur-based businessman, had accused a Kashmir-based businessman (the respondent) of not paying for jewellery and having links to militants. These allegations resulted in the respondent's arrest and subsequent legal proceedings. After a thorough investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), it was found that the respondent had no links to militant organizations, and he was granted bail by the Rajasthan High Court in 2016.

Following this, the respondent filed a defamation suit against the petitioner, claiming that the false allegations led to his unlawful detention, business losses, and damage to his reputation.

A Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar said, “The law is well settled that when pleadings containing defamatory material are relied before a court of law, the same amounts to publication within the meaning of Section 499 of RPC.”

The Court added, “Taking a cue from this, it can safely be stated that even the arguments made by a counsel upon instructions from his client, which are per se defamatory in nature, can form basis for prosecution of such client for offence under Section 499 of RPC.”

Senior Advocate ZA Qureshi appeared for the Petitioner.

The petitioner argued that the defamation case was invalid for two reasons: first, that the allegations of militant connections were made by his lawyer without his consent or advice, and second, that since the allegations were made before courts in Jaipur and not in Jammu and Kashmir, the Srinagar court lacked territorial jurisdiction.

The High Court rejected the first argument, affirming that defamatory statements made in court, whether in pleadings or arguments, are considered published under the RPC, making them actionable for defamation. The Court said, “Therefore, the contention of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments on bail application of the respondent before the Court at Jaipur cannot form basis for prosecution of the petitioner for offence under Section 499 of RPC, is not tenable.”

However, the Court agreed with the second argument and determined that since the alleged defamatory actions occurred outside the jurisdiction of Jammu and Kashmir, the trial could not be conducted in Srinagar. The Court said, “The petitioner is a resident of Rajasthan and he is alleged to have committed offence of criminal defamation beyond the limits of erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir, as such, he cannot be prosecuted at Srinagar in the instant case.”

Therefore, the Court allowed the petitioner's plea and held that the case could not be tried in Srinagar.

Cause Title: Satya Prakash Arya v. Syed Abid Jalali

Appearance:

Petitioner: Senior advocate ZA Qureshi and advocate Agha Faisal Ali