Sukanya wins defamation case against Sun TV over Veerappan interview
What's the story
In a landmark ruling, the Madras High Court has ordered Sun TV to pay over ₹10L in damages to actor R Sukanya. The order comes after the channel aired defamatory remarks against her by notorious bandit Veerappan in 1996. Justice K Kumaresh Babu dismissed an appeal by Sun TV against a Chennai court's 2015 verdict, stating the channel failed to verify the authenticity of Veerappan's claims, reported Bar and Bench.
Verification lapse
Court found channel had editorial control over interview
The court noted that Sun TV did not seek clarification from Sukanya or verify Veerappan's claims with other sources. The channel had editorial control over the interview as per its agreement with the interviewer, Rajagopal (RR Gopal). "Having reserved the right to edit, cut, delete, or modify, alter, and add any portion with an unrestricted right, it is the duty that is enjoined upon the appellant to verify the contents of the interview before its publication," ruled the court.
Defamation case
Here's what Veerappan said about Sukanya
Sun TV aired the interview with Veerappan on April 17, 1996. In the interview, Veerappan made unverified claims about Sukanya's alleged relationship with former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao's son. He claimed that a video of them was used by former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa to strike a deal with Congress before the 1996 general elections. Sukanya filed a defamation suit in 1996, calling the allegations false and defamatory.
Appeal dismissed
Network's arguments rejected by court
Sun TV appealed against the 2015 order, arguing it couldn't be held liable as it wasn't the originator of the statement. The channel added that it didn't re-telecast the program after receiving notice from Sukanya. However, the court dismissed this appeal after finding that Sun TV had not exercised due diligence to verify Veerappan's claims. The court also rejected Sun TV's argument that Sukanya hadn't proved loss of reputation due to the controversial interview.
Regret ruling
Court declined to grant relief based on subsequent regret
The court also declined to grant the channel any relief based on the subsequent regret published in a Tamil magazine. "If such a regret [had] been published in its own broadcast, it would have reached the very same viewer who would have viewed the publication it had made earlier," said the bench. "This itself would show malice on the part of the appellant in only opting to give a regret in a third-party magazine."