Cyber Defamation under BNS Section 356: Criminal & Civil Remedies (2026)
A corporate CEO discovers a Twitter thread with 50,000 views calling him a "fraud who looted investors." The thread names his company, tags business media handles, and includes screenshots of out-of-context internal emails. His investors are calling. Board members are concerned. The stock price dropped 3% the day the thread went viral.
Is this defamation? Can he get the post taken down? Can he put the person who posted it in jail?
Under BNS Section 356 (replacing IPC Sections 499/500), criminal defamation carries up to 2 years imprisonment. Civil defamation can result in damages of Rs 50 lakhs or more. And Section 79 of the IT Act creates a takedown mechanism through the platform's grievance officer. NyayaVeda AI provides instant citation-verified research on BNS 356 defamation, the 10 exceptions, and social media takedown precedents.
What Is Cyber Defamation under BNS Section 356?
Cyber defamation under BNS Section 356 is the making or publishing of a defamatory statement online — including on social media, messaging platforms, or websites — that lowers a person's reputation in the eyes of others, with the intent to harm or knowledge that harm will result. BNS Section 356 replaced IPC Sections 499 and 500, preserving all ten exceptions including truth published for public good, fair comment, and privileged reporting.
BNS 356: Criminal Defamation
What Is Defamation?
Making or publishing any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing it will harm, the reputation of that person.
Four elements the prosecution must prove:
- 2Imputation — a statement of fact (not opinion) about the person
- 4Publication — communicated to a third party (social media post = published to the world)
- 6Lowering reputation — the statement must lower the person's reputation in the estimation of others
- 8Intention or knowledge — the maker intended to harm or knew harm would result
Punishment
| Offence | BNS Section | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| Criminal defamation | 356(1) | Up to 2 years imprisonment + fine |
| Printing/engraving defamatory matter | 356(2) | Up to 2 years + fine |
The 10 Exceptions (Absolute Defences)
BNS 356 preserves all 10 exceptions from IPC 499. If ANY exception applies — no defamation:
| # | Exception | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Truth for public good | Exposing corruption of a public servant — if true AND published for public benefit |
| 2 | Public conduct of public servants | Criticising an MLA's voting record in Parliament |
| 3 | Conduct touching public question | Commenting on a company's environmental violations |
| 4 | Publication of court proceedings | Reporting what happened in open court (fair and accurate) |
| 5 | Merits of decided case | Analysing a court judgment — even critically |
| 6 | Merits of public performance | Reviewing a movie, book, product, or public speech |
| 7 | Censure by authority | A manager criticising an employee's work performance in official context |
| 8 | Complaint to authority | Filing a complaint against a doctor with the Medical Council |
| 9 | Imputation for protection of interest | Warning a friend that a business partner is untrustworthy (bona fide, private) |
| 10 | Caution for good of person | Telling someone their spouse is cheating — if done privately and for their welfare |
Exception 1 is the most critical: Truth IS a defence to defamation — but ONLY if published for public good. Truth published for private vendetta is NOT protected.
Civil Defamation: Damages Route
Criminal defamation = jail threat. Civil defamation = money.
| Parameter | Criminal (BNS 356) | Civil (Tort) |
|---|---|---|
| Filed before | Magistrate (private complaint) | Civil Court / High Court |
| Burden of proof | Beyond reasonable doubt | Preponderance of probability (lower) |
| Remedy | Imprisonment + fine | Damages (money) + injunction (takedown) |
| Timeline | 1-3 years trial | 1-5 years (but interim injunction in weeks) |
| Strategic use | Criminal pressure for takedown | Financial compensation + permanent injunction |
File BOTH simultaneously: Criminal complaint creates urgency (jail threat → person takes down the post). Civil suit creates the damages claim. Most defamation matters settle after the criminal complaint is filed.
Social Media Defamation: Platform Takedown
IT Act Section 79 + IT Rules 2021
| Step | Action | Timeline |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Report the post through platform's reporting mechanism | Immediate |
| 2 | If not removed → file written complaint with platform's Grievance Officer | — |
| 3 | Grievance Officer must acknowledge within 24 hours | 24 hours |
| 4 | Grievance Officer must resolve within 15 days | 15 days |
| 5 | If unresolved → appeal to Grievance Appellate Committee (GAC) | 30 days |
| 6 | Simultaneously → file court application for takedown injunction | 1-2 weeks |
Getting a Court-Ordered Takedown
File an application under Order 39 CPC (or writ petition if against government):
- Seek interim injunction directing the platform to remove the defamatory content
- Courts regularly grant ex-parte takedown orders in clear defamation cases
- The platform must comply — failure = contempt
Defence Strategies Against Defamation
| Defence | When It Works |
|---|---|
| Truth + public good (Exception 1) | Statement is factually true AND published for public benefit — strongest defence |
| Fair comment | Opinion on a matter of public interest — clearly an opinion, not a statement of fact |
| Privilege (Exception 4-5) | Court reporting, parliamentary reporting, or fair criticism of decided cases |
| No publication | Private message (not shared with third party) — no publication = no defamation |
| Consent | The person consented to the publication (unlikely but possible) |
| Section 66A is struck down | If charged under IT Act 66A — quash immediately (Shreya Singhal 2015) |
| No lowering of reputation | The statement, even if unpleasant, does not actually lower reputation (e.g., calling someone "conservative") |
Landmark Judgments
| Case | Year | Ratio | When to Cite |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India | 2016 SC | Criminal defamation (IPC 499/500, now BNS 356) is CONSTITUTIONAL — does not violate Article 19(1)(a) | When defamation law itself is challenged |
| Shreya Singhal v. Union of India | 2015 SC | Section 66A struck down — but defamation under IPC/BNS and civil law survives | Distinguishing 66A from defamation |
| R. Rajagopal v. State of TN | 1994 SC | Right to privacy vs free speech — public figures have reduced privacy protection for public conduct | Public figure defamation cases |
| S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal | 2010 SC | Statements on matters of social concern by public figures — broad protection under free speech | Opinion vs fact distinction |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is online defamation treated differently from offline?
No — the law is the same. BNS 356 applies to defamatory statements made orally, in print, or electronically. A defamatory tweet is treated identically to a defamatory newspaper article. The only difference is the takedown mechanism — online platforms have grievance officers and IT Rules compliance obligations.
Can a company be defamed?
Yes — companies have reputation that can be injured. A company can file both criminal complaint (through an authorised officer) and civil suit for defamation. Damages for corporate defamation can be significant — especially if stock price or business contracts were affected.
Is truth always a defence?
Truth is a defence only if published for public good (Exception 1). Truth published out of malice, for personal vendetta, or without any public interest element is not protected. The burden of proving truth + public good is on the defendant.
Can I be sued for a retweet or share?
Yes — sharing defamatory content constitutes "publication." Every person who republishes defamatory material is independently liable. A retweet with endorsement = fresh publication. However, merely sharing a news article without adding defamatory commentary is generally defensible.
What damages can be awarded in civil defamation?
Courts assess injury to reputation, mental anguish, financial loss, and aggravated damages if the defamation was particularly malicious. Awards range from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 1 crore+ in Indian courts, depending on the plaintiff's profile and extent of publication. Verify this analysis using NyayaVeda AI's source-verified research platform.
Quick Reference Card
⚖️ DEFAMATION — QUICK REFERENCE
CRIMINAL: BNS 356 — up to 2 years + fine CIVIL: Tort — damages + injunction BOTH can be filed simultaneously
4 ELEMENTS: Imputation + publication + lowering reputation + intent 10 EXCEPTIONS: Truth for public good is #1
TAKEDOWN: Platform Grievance Officer (24hr ack / 15-day resolve) → GAC → Court injunction
⚠️ 66A = STRUCK DOWN — do NOT charge under IT Act 66A
Research Defamation Law Instantly with NyayaVeda AI
🔒 Advocate Privacy Shield NyayaVeda AI is DPDP Act 2023 compliant. Your data is never stored or used for training.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice.
Last Updated: August 2026 | Author: NyayaVeda Legal Research Team
Research these topics in 5 seconds — not 5 hours
858 Central Acts · 1.2 crore+ SC & HC judgments · BNS/BNSS/BSA auto-concordance · Citation-verified · Hindi supported
More on Technology Law
Related Guides from Other Practice Areas
Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal matters, consult a qualified advocate registered with the Bar Council of India. NyayaVeda AI is an AI-powered research tool, not a law firm, and does not establish any advocate-client relationship.