The Price of a Bad Review: How Corporations Weaponize Defamation to Silence Online Dissent
In an alarming trend, powerful corporations are increasingly leveraging defamation laws to target individual consumers who voice grievances online. Legal experts assert that these lawsuits are often designed not to secure damages but to intimidate consumers into silence, creating a chilling effect on free speech. These protracted legal battles can span years, leaving individuals financially drained and emotionally exhausted, as highlighted by numerous cases across India.
Case Studies: The Human Cost of Corporate Litigation
Suchir Kalra, a 25-year-old student at Ashoka University, faced a Rs 2.2 crore defamation suit in 2021 from the Indian arm of a global appliance firm. The lawsuit stemmed from four posts on X (formerly Twitter) where Kalra criticized a malfunctioning dishwasher and poor customer service, calling the company "dictators" and accusing them of scamming customers. Since then, Kalra and his mother have spent approximately Rs 5 lakh on legal fees, funded largely through crowd-sourcing from professors and friends. "The stigma of this case follows me everywhere," Kalra reveals. "I'm scared to write anything on social media now. My mother is constantly worried about our financial security."
Similarly, Vatsal Mishra, a 27-year-old marketing professional from Delhi, was sued for Rs 5 lakh by a motorcycle manufacturer in 2024 after posting on X and Instagram about unresolved performance and maintenance issues with his bike. Despite moving a consumer complaint in Delhi, the Pune case continues, with a temporary injunction granted to the company restraining Mishra from defamatory statements. "I was shocked. This was so unexpected and scary," Mishra says, noting he has spent Rs 1 lakh on litigation but refuses to delete his factual posts or apologize.
In Mumbai, six defamation cases filed by a major hospitality company have been pending since 2021. One involves Shailendra Tyagi, a 59-year-old hotelier from Dehradun, sued for Rs 99 lakh over Facebook comments accusing the company of misleading customers. The case has cost Tyagi Rs 5 lakh and allegedly led to hypertension. "Even if the decision is against me, I'm ready to go to jail if I'm proven wrong. But the court can't just keep us hanging," he laments.
Even legal professionals are not immune. Brigadier Vivek Chhatre (Retd), a Pune-based advocate, was sued in 2023 by the same hospitality company over news videos and an online petition alleging deceptive practices. The company secured court orders to take down posts and restrain further statements. "First these companies seek an injunction. When they get it, they file frivolous applications alleging a breach of that injunction," Chhatre explains. "Such proceedings are elongated simply to exhaust the person."
Journalist Krishnaraj Rao, 60, also faced a lawsuit from a real estate developer in 2021 for highlighting alleged deceptive practices in videos that included the company's rebuttals. Relying on crowd funding for his defence, Rao notes, "So much of my time has been wasted just appearing before the court."
The Chilling Effect on Consumer Rights and Free Speech
This strategy of prolonged litigation is creating a "chilling effect," discouraging consumers from airing legitimate grievances. Sushila, an associate professor at National Law University, Delhi, states, "Defamation law in India is generally misused by the stronger party against the weaker side." Ashok R Patil, vice-chancellor at the National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi, concurs, describing such lawsuits as a tactic to force consumers into silence.
Despite this, courts have occasionally intervened to protect consumer rights. In February last year, the Delhi High Court rejected a defamation plaint by Addictive Learning Technology Limited against individuals who questioned its ed-tech platform on social media. The court observed that X is a "casual conversational medium" and that defamation requires proof of "substantial injury to reputation," not just hurt feelings. Similarly, the Madras High Court quashed a criminal defamation case in March 2023, stating that harsh expressions of dissatisfaction online do not amount to defamation.
Ashish Goel, a constitutional and tax lawyer involved in the Delhi case, warns, "For someone without legal knowledge or money, facing a defamation case for large sums can be daunting." Vipul Shukla, a Delhi-based consumer law lawyer, adds, "Such suits strangle consumer rights and the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression."
As corporations continue to weaponize defamation laws, the balance between protecting reputation and upholding free speech remains a critical issue, with consumers often bearing the brunt of these legal battles.
