INTRODUCTION
On August 29, a Civil Court in Bengaluru passed an interim order in the high profile case of Dharmasthala burials case ordered medial portals, youtube channels and other online platforms to withdraw all the defamatory contents against the Dharmasthala temple and its hereditary head, D Veerendra Heggade and his family in connection with burial case.
CONTEXT OF THE CASE
The controversy arises from the prominent Dharmasthala Temple in Karnataka. The defamation case originated from the accusations made by a sanitation worker claiming several bodies were buried in Dharmasthala. He was later arrested by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on giving false evidence after irregularities were noticed in his statements. In the past months several online platforms including facebooks, social media, and websites have circulated materials relating to temple burial practices. According to the temple representatives the allegations were false and defamatory and intended to harm the reputation of the temple and its Dharamadhikari along with his family. Since the content went beyond criticism and became a personal attack, the temple authorities approached the court against defamation.
PROVISION OF LAWS
The above case also focuses on the laws under defamation. In India defamation is both civil and criminal law. Under tort law an affected person can institute a civil suit against damages occurred due to any defamatory content. Section 499 of IPC also defines defamation as making or publishing any statement that harms the reputation of a person, company or institution and is punishable under law.
COURTS DIRECTION
The Bengaluru Court pointed out that while freedom of speech is a fundamental right that doesn’t mean it cannot be used as a shield for defamation or attacks on character. Religious and charitable institutions, like individuals, have the right to protect their reputation in this digital era. The interim order was passed by Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Anitha M after a hearing in a defamation suit.
CONCLUSION
The court ordered urgent take down of defamatory contents targeting the Dharmasthala temple and its hereditary head, D Veerendra Heggade and his family in connection with the mass burial case. This order highlights the judiciary’s role in balancing two important rights: the freedom of rights and the right to reputation. The courts balance Artivle 19(1)(a) freedom of speech with Article 21 right to reputation. The court also gave a clear message to all the content creators and all the digital platforms to act responsibly in this digital ere
AUTHOR DETAILS:-
Aswathy S Menon, a law graduate from Mar Gregorios College of Law, Thiruvananthapuram, and Practicing as a lawyer at High Court of Kerala with over two years of experience in litigation, compliance, and legal research. She has contributed to legal content writing and worked on civil, criminal, and corporate matters, with particular interests in corporate governance, contract law, and dispute resolution.