VIJAYAN Vs. KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against the order of acquittal passed by the Additional First Class Magistrate of Ernakulam acquitting the accused who had been prosecuted for an offence under S. 500 I. P. C. The appellant is a graduate belonging to the Ezhava Community and is employed as a clerk in the Cochin Harbour Administrative Office. The accused Shri Krishnan is said to be the General Secretary of an association styled as " Keral a Peruvannar Velavadi Samudayika Federation", Chullikkal , Cochin. The case against him was that he published a pamphlet in Malayalam with the caption "" CRf-fo WLO jn-fm-pl-e v. In paragraph two of the said leaflet the appellant has been described as a "" Anm j-v-W-C"" and it was stated therein that the appellant was responsible for the pregnancy of a harijan unmarried lady by name Thankamma and that he tried to cause miscarriage when he knew that she was pregnant. On 26-8-60 a notice marked Ext. P-2 was published intimating that a protest meeting would be held in the Municipal Park Maidan at Palluruthy. At the meeting the accused read Ext. P-1 and made a defamatory speech regarding the appellant with intent to harm his reputation and lower him in the estimate of others. The fact that the accused got Exts. P-1 and P-2 printed at the Janatha Printing Works, Cochin that he got it distributed, that a meeting was held in pursuance of the notice, that he read the notice and spoke at the meeting are all amply proved by the prosecution and is admitted by the accused. It has not been seriously disputed that Exts. P-1 and P-2 are per se defamatory and the learned First Class Magistrate also has found the imputations to be defamatory. Therefore unless the accused can bring himself within any one of the exceptions to S. 499 I. P. C. he would be clearly guilty of the offence under S. 500 IPC.

(2.) THE case of the accused is that he is protected by exception 9 to S. 499 IPC. THE learned First Class Magistrate on a consideration of the evidence was of opinion that the publication was made in good faith for the protection of scheduled caste people and that the case would come under exception 9 and on that ground acquitted the accused. Aggrieved with the order the appellant has filed this appeal after obtaining special leave under S. 417 (3) Crl. P. C.

(3.) IT is true that in order to bring it within exception 9 an accused person is not bound to prove that the imputation made by him is true. IT is sufficient for him to prove that he made it in good faith for the protection of any person or for public good. If he proves that on reasonable grounds, he believed the imputation to be true and in that belief he bona fide made it, he will be protected. Therefore "good faith" is of the essence of Exception 9. A reading of Exceptions 2 , 3 and 9 would show that the exception applies only to expressions of opinion or imputations on character and not to assertions of fact. The latter can be justified only by truth. Comment must be on actual and not on imagined conduct and even if the accused person genuinely believed the imputed conduct to be real that would be no defence. If the opinion or the imputation purports to be based on facts, then the person claiming the benefit of these exceptions must prove those facts.