IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of 'good faith' under Exception 9 to Explanation 4 of Section 499 IPC in the context of defamation.

JUDGMENT :

P. SOMARAJAN, J.

1. It is a case wherein, criminal law was set in motion at the instance of the complainant alleging offence punishable under Section 500 IPC. The court below found that though the imputation is per se defamatory, it would come under Exception 9 to Explanation 4 of Section 499 IPC and hence acquitted the accused. It is against the said order of acquittal, the complainant came up in appeal.

2. The short facts of the case are as follows:

The appellant, who is a lawyer by profession went to his native place at Chavakkad on 15.07.1999 to attend a festival in the native church and went to Youth Centre at Palayoor to see his old friends. While he was sitting along with his friends, the first respondent, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chavakkad came there along with some policemen and manhandled the appellant and took him to the police station, then to a nearby hospital. The doctor, who attended the appellant issued a certificate that he was not intoxicated by alcohol. A crime was registered against the appellant alleging offences under Section 7 and 8 of the Kerala Gaming Act. It was challenged before this court in Crl. M.C. No. 8349/2001 and this court quashed the proceedings. It is thereafter the appellant preferred a complaint before the JFCM, Chavakkad against the first respondent alleging offence punishable under Section 500 IPC on the ground that a civil suit was instituted by the appellant as O.S. No. 46/2000 before the Munsiff Court, Chavakkad claiming damages, in which a written statement was submitted raising false imputation against the appellant. The portion of the written statement which according to the appellant is defamatory was also extracted in the complaint, which runs as follows:

“It is untrue to say that on 15.07.1999 the plaintiff went over to the youth centre at Palayoor with a view to meet some of his friends and his brother. He is specific intention behind the same was to get involved in gambling as usually he does, for making money easily and unauthorisedly.”

3. The trial court acquitted the accused on the reason that though the imputation is defamatory, it would come under Exception 9 attached to Explanation 4 of Section 499 IPC. It is against the said order of acquittal, the appellant came up.

4. The ninth exception to Explanation 4 of Section 499 IPC excludes any defamatory statement made in good faith for the protection of interest of the person making or of any other person or for the public good. When there is an imputation, if it is made in good faith to protect the interest of the maker or of any other person or for the public good, it would come under the purview of 9th exception, though the imputation is per se defamatory. In order to bring the matter within the sweep of 9th exception, the cardinal ingredient which would constitute, the “good faith” must be satisfied. The expression “good faith” incorporated in the 9th exception, must always be read along with the definition clause, Section 52 of Indian Penal Code, which says that:

“52. “Good faith” - Nothing is said to be done or believed in “good faith” which is done or believed without due care and attention.”

5. The necessary ingredient which would constitute “good faith” is either the belief of or the exercise of due care and attention. The Apex Court in Re: S.K. Sundaram, AIR 2001 SC 2374, has laid down that the expression “good faith” in criminal jurisprudence has a definite connotation. Its import is totally different from saying that the person concerned has honestly believed the truth of what is said.

6. A three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Harbajan Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1966 SC 97, had gone elaborately on the question what actually amounts to and what are the requirement of “good faith” and laid down in paragraphs 19 and 21, which are extracted below for reference:

“19. That takes us to the question as to what the requirement of good faith means. Good faith is defined by Section 52 of the Code. Nothing, says S