The burden is on the accused to prove that his case falls under any of the exceptions to S.499 I.P.C. The defence of fair comment applies only to expressions of opinion or imputations on character, not to assertions of fact. The accused must prove the truth of the imputations and demonstrate good faith and exercise of due care and attention.

1. This is an appeal by special leave under S.417 (3) Crl. P.C. to quash the order of acquittal passed by the District Magistrate of Trivandrum in Calendar Case No. 24 of 1962. The complainant Sri. G. Chandrasekhara Pillai is an Ex-Minister, a member of the Kerala Legislative Assembly and was the President of the Trivandrum District Textile Printing and Allied Mills Industrial Co-operative Society Limited (shortly stated the society). The accused Sri G. Raman Pillai is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of a weekly called 'Navasakthi' having a fairly good circulation in Trivandrum City and other places.

2. The appellant filed a complaint before the District Magistrate, Trivandrum against the respondent alleging that he had defamed him by publishing in his weekly paper, an article purporting to be from one R. Sankara Pillai entitled "An alarming hoax" with a sub heading "Attempted swindle of eight lakhs of rupees" and for having circulated the same among the public. The case of the appellant is that the allegations contained in the article in so far as it refers to him are absolutely false and baseless and was made and published with intent to defame and harm his reputation.

3. The article Ext. P-1(a) refers to an attempted conspiracy to swindle eight lakhs of rupees from the Government. The names of four persons have been mentioned as parties to the fraud, one of whom is described as a high-headed Trivandrum Leader, "a permanent stay vakil" who later became 'a Minister' and now 'an M.L.A.' with wife by name Sarada. The article stated that the records of the society showed that there were 26 share-holders who were said to have contributed a some of Rs. 75,000/- as capital and because of the undue pressure exerted on the District Industries Officer the society happened to be registered. The article continued to state that forty cents of land with a shed and 210 looms were shown as having been purchased for a sum of Rs. 86,000/- that on the strength of this investment a loan of rupees eight lakhs was applied for, that the application was presented directly to the Minister and when it was referred to the Industries Department the Director of Industries did not favour the granting of the loan. Subsequently, complaints reached the Central Government and the State Government and on the matter being referred to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, an audit was conducted when it was disclosed that it was only 'a pocket society', that all the cash transactions shown in the Society's books were false, that none of the persons had paid the share money and that the entries that the share capital had been collected is false. The article further stated that when the property was revalued the land value was fixed at Rs. 250/- percent, that the Public Works Department reported that the value of the building is in excess by Rs. 5,000/-, that when the looms etc., were got valued only 50 looms were seen and for a property and equipments which would fetch only Rs. 20,000/- a sum of Rs. 86,000/- was shown as having been paid, that this is a clear attempt to swindle the public money, that there was a conspiracy to defraud and cheat the Government and for facilitating the commission of the offence false documents had been prepared, offence punishable under the Penal Code. The article concluded by saying that this is one of the many instances in which swindlers (robbers) and exploiters who are so placed as to be able to apply pressure, have taken away amounts set apart by the benign Government to encourage the poor textile workers and that it is the duty of the people to prevent such happenings.

4. On the publication of the article the appellant caused a lawyer's notice to be sent to the accused demanding a public withdrawal of the allegations and an apology and requesting him to furnish the full address of the person who is shown as the author of the article. On the failure of the accused to do so, a criminal complaint was filed before th