Judgment

RAY, J.: - This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the Patna High Court dated 30 October, 1967 dismissing an application in the criminal revisional jurisdiction against the judgment of the First Additional Judicial Commissioner Ranchi dated 31-7-1971 upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ranchi. The appellant was convicted under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months

2. There was a proceeding under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code between the respondents and the appellant regarding some land in the village Hatma in the district of Ranchi in the State of Bihar. The land was recorded in the names of two brothers Karma Ahir and Faizu Ahir. The appellant is the grand-son of Kanna Ahir. Faizu Ahir had two sons by his first wife. Both of them died during his lifetime. The respondent and his brother Sahdeo Mahto claimed the land as sons of Faizu Ahir by his second wife. This led to a dispute between the parties. There was a proceeding under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Both the parties were called upon to show cause. The appellant in showing cause described Basdeo Mahto and his brother Sahdeo Mahto as illegitimate sons of Faizu Ahir having been born of concubine.

3. The prosecution case was that the complainant s brother-in-law was present in the Court of the Sub Divisional Officer in the month of November 1965 when the appellant s lawyer submitted before the Sub Divisional Officer that the respondent and his brother were illegitimate sons of Faizu Ahir having been born of concubine. The complainant then obtained a certified copy of the written statement filed by the appellant. Thereafter the complainant filed the complaint. The case of the complainant was that Faizu Ahir had married Mst. Sauni, who was a widow, in Sagai form more than 40 years ago amending to the custom prevalent among the Yadav community. She was living with Faizu Ahir as his wedded wife and was treated as such by the community. The appellant and his brother were born long after the marriage and were the legitimate sons of Faizu Ahir. The complainant alleged that the appellant made the statements with a view to humiliating and defaming the appellant and his brother.

4. The appellant pleaded not guilty. His defence was that the statements made in the written statements were true. The appellant further said that he had to disclose this fact as the respondent and his brother dishonestly claimed the property to which they had no right.

5. The findings of fact are these., Faizu Ahir married Sauni in Sagai form. The respondent was the legitimate son of Faizu Ahir. On these findings the Magistrate held that the statements in the written statement were false and defamatory. The appellant was convicted under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. The First Additional Judicial Commissioner of Chota Nagpur, Ranchi heard the appeal preferred by the appellant and upheld the conviction and confirmed the sentence. The Additional Judicial Commissioner held that the appellant did not lead any oral evidence to Show that he acted in good faith. The appellant relied on a certified copy of the deposition of the respondent in case No. GR. 775/65. There the respondent was asked a question in that case as to whether Faizu Ahir had kept a concubine and whether he was the son of that concubine. The respondent replied that he did not know that Faim Ahir kept a concubine and that he was the son of the concubine. On this evidence of the respondent in case No. GR: 775/65 it was argued on behalf of the appellant before the Judicial Commissioner that the respondent did not categorically deny the suggestion that Faizu Ahir had kept a concubine and that he was the son of the concubine, and, therefore, the appellant did not act out of malice. The Judicial Commissioner held that the entire evidence of