Chapter 5.16 - Laws Relating to the Use of Abusive Words and Defamation

The title of law, known as vākpāruṣya, discussed in eight verses by Yājñavalkya, governs the law relating to the dispute for using abusive words or to the defamation of a person. According to him, one becomes punishable with a fine of half of thirteen paṇas for committing the offence of vākpāruṣya, if he irrespective of the fact true, false or ironically maligns or defames another as having a defective limb or organ or suffering from a disease.^[1] The king has to punish one with a fine of twenty-five paṇas, who is found guilty of abusing another with the words that he has known that person’s mother or sister.^[2] In case of abuse of an inferior person, penalty to be undergone is half of the original fine. One has to pay double the fine for abusing or vilifying other’s wives and also for abusing one relatively superior.^[3] Commenting on these provisions, the Mitākṣarā is of the opinion that inferior or superior refers to mode of living and such other qualities like learning, conduct, etc.^[4] The author lays down punishment, which varies according to the varṇa and jāti of the abuser and the person abused.^[5]

Yājñavalkya provides that when a person of an inferior caste insults verbally or abuses one, belonging to superior order, then the fine to be imposed are twofold or threefold respectively. In reverse case, i.e., a person of superior caste when uses abusive language towards a person of inferior order the penalty should be reduced in the ratio of a half respectively.^[6] If person uses offensive words indicating to cause any harm or injury to one’s arm, neck, eye or thigh, a fine of hundred paṇas is recommended by the author. On the contrary, in case of the same offence, pertaining to limbs, such as, hands or feet, ears, nose, etc., half of that, i.e., fifty paṇas may be imposed.^[7] Moreover, in this context, Yājñavalkya has proclaimed a very prudent rule considering the strength of the abuser. The fine to be paid in that offence becomes only ten paṇas when the person committing the offence is feeble, i.e., devoid of strength. Likewise, in case of a person capable of abusing in that way has to furnish security for ensuring protection of the person so abused.^[8] While bringing this difference, the author is very much correct as uttering of such offensive words by a person, capable of strength, causes more fear in the mind of that person so abused.

Yājñavalkya while laying down punishment for various kinds of abuse also considers the consequences that may follow from the abused. Therefore, he ordains fine of middle amercement when the defamatory words used against a person likely to cause his degradation from caste or society. The fine of lowest amercement is prescribed, if one is defamed by imputing the commission of secondary sin. ^[9] The highest form of pecuniary punishment is authorised for an offence of abuse and defamation committed towards a Brāhmaṇā, learned in three Vedas, the king and a deity. The second type of pecuniary punishment is ordained for defaming or abusing a caste and association of public bodies and lowest for vilifying a village or country.^[10] Here in this rule, it may be noticed that the offence of abuse or defamation is not confined to individual only, imputation may concern class of individuals such as relating to caste, public bodies, village, country, etc.

The corresponding laws to the vākpāruṣya of the Yājñavalkyasmṛti now are found under Section 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, which is known as the law of defamation. Accordingly, at present, imputation concerning any person intending to harm with knowledge or having reason to believe that such imputation harms the reputation of that person, except in certain cases, is called to defame that person. It is considered as criminal offence punishable under Section 500 with simple imprisonment for a term that may extend up to two years, or with fine or with both.^[11] It is interesting that the present law also considers that defamation may concern a company, association or a collection of persons as such like that of the Yājñavalkyasmṛti. Another remedy is available for defamation under law of torts.^[12]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

satyāstyānyathāstotrairnyūnāṅgendriyarogiṇām/ kṣepaṃ karoti deddaṇḍyaḥ praṇānardhatrayodaśān// Yājñavalkyasmṛti,2.204

[2]:

Ibid.,2.205

[3]:

ardho’dhameṣu dviguṇaḥ parastrīṣūttameṣu ca/ Ibid.,2.206

[4]:

adhameṣvākṣeptrāpekṣayā nyūnavṛttādiguṇeṣvardho daṇḍaḥ/…tathottameṣu ca svāpekṣayādhikaśrutabṛtteṣu daṇḍaḥ pañcaśatpaṇātmaka eva/ Mitākṣarā, Ibid.

[5]:

daṇḍapraṇayanam kāryam varṇajātyuttarādharaiḥ// Yājñavalkyasmṛti,2.206

[6]:

pratilomyāpavādeṣu dviguṇatriguṇā damaḥ/ varṇānāmānulomyena tasmādardhārdhahānitaḥ// Ibid.,2.207

[7]:

bāhugrīvānetrasakthivināśe vācike damaḥ/ śatyastadardhikaḥ pādanāsākarṇakarādiṣu// Ibid.,2.208

[8]:

Ibid.,2.209

[9]:

Ibid.,2.210

[10]:

traividyanṛpadevānāṃ kṣepa uttamasāhasaḥ/ madhyamo jātipūgānāṃ prathamo grāmadeśayoḥ// Ibid.,2.211

[11]:

Misra, S.N., Indian Penal Code, pages 852-865

[12]:

Bangia, R.K., Law of Torts, page183-219