Is an Advocate Speaking for a Client Liable for Defamation? - Explore

In the legal profession, advocates act as representatives of their clients, presenting facts, arguments, and defenses before courts. However, can a lawyer be prosecuted for communicating for or on behalf of a client? To be specific, can a lawyer be held liable for defamation for statements made while representing a client? This issue sits at the intersection of professional duty, client representation, and the law of defamation. Let us discuss the role of an advocate, and refer to what the Madras High Court opined in this direction.

Role of an Advocate

An advocate in India is a lawyer who possesses a license to practice law before the Courts and other Judicial & Quasi-Judicial bodies. An advocate’s primary duty is to represent the client’s case fearlessly and effectively. While doing so, he/she may:

Rely on facts provided by the client,

Communicate the client’s version of facts
Present legal arguments fearlessly
Ensure procedural fairness
Assist the court in arriving at justice

It may be noted that the law does not require an advocate to verify factual assertions made by the client. A lawyer representing a client in the Court of law is to merely act on their instructions, while following professional ethics and legal limitations.

What Constitutes Defamation in Indian Law?

Defamation in India is governed by both civil and criminal laws. In other words, it can attract civil liability or damages, or criminal prosecution under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. In terms of law, anything said or written or gestured in a way as to accuse someone, which may harm the reputation of another, is defamation.

However, defamation law does not end here. There are parts of statutory provision which lay the exceptions, and legal professionals and Court proceedings are one of them. When an advocate represents a client in the Court of Law, he/she states everything on behalf of the client. An advocate cannot be prosecuted for statements made within the scope of their professional duty and on client instructions.

What Madras High Court said on Lawyer Accused of Defamation

This happened in the case of J.N. Naresh Kumar vs Radhika Dolia (2026). This was a matrimonial case which emanated into several complaints like POCSO, and instant case of defamation. One of the persons implicated as an accused for defamation was advocate who appeared on behalf of his clients.

The Madras High Court quashed the defamation case against the advocate with the following reasoning:

“A lawyer is an advocate, who speaks on behalf of another. Naturally beyond the instructions given by the client, a lawyer has no opportunity to verify the truth or falsity of the facts narrated by the client. Therefore, no lawyer can be prosecuted for defamation in respect of any statements made on the basis of instruction given by the client. It is the duty of the lawyer to decide whether he can properly act upon such instructions, and whatever responsibility may arise from acting upon those instructions would rest with the client and not with the lawyer. Any contrary view would be opposed to the settled trend of judicial decisions defining the scope and extent of the privilege conferred upon a lawyer. Hence, the entire complaint is nothing but a clear abuse of process of law insofar as the Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the first and second accused, is concerned.”

Advocate-Client Privilege

The Section law recognizes certain privileges that protect participants in judicial proceedings. One such protection is advocate’s privilege. Section 134 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 lays about confidential communication with legal advisers. It clarifies that no person can be compelled to share any confidential communication between a person and his legal adviser before the Court. The phenomenon of attorney-client privilege ensures that:

Freedom to represent clients without fear
Protection for statements made in judicial proceedings
Preservation of the adversarial legal system

It may be noted that the privilege is not absolute, but subject to certain limitations. For example, it should be confined to the scope of professional duty, and proceedings in good faith based on client’s instructions.

Exceptions to Advocate’s Privilege

As mentioned earlier, the privilege is not absolute, but subject to certain exceptions. An advocate may still face consequences if:

They act maliciously or in bad faith
They commit a crime under the garb of advocate-client communication
They knowingly make false statements beyond client instructions
They engage in misconduct or unethical behavior
Statements made outside judicial proceedings lack protection

Crux of Madras High Court’s Protection to Advocate

The decision of Madras High Court in J.N. Naresh Kumar vs Radhika Dolia reaffirmed a foundational principle. It clarified that an advocate is not liable for defamation when acting on a client’s instructions within the scope of professional duty. Such a legal protection is necessary for upholding integrity of the legal profession and ensuring that every individual has access to robust and fearless representation. It further strikes a balance on ethical and judicial facets of responsibility upon advocates presenting a client’s case.