Petitioner, Thangavelu, has been convicted under section 500 Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 200

and out of the fine amount if realised, Rs. 100 has been ordered to be paid to P.W.1 as compensation under section

545(1), Criminal Procedure Code.

The petitioner described the complainant Ponnammal as (concubine) of P.W.2, Namasivaya Odayar in a plaint filed by

him in S.C. No. 349 of 1963 on the file of the District Munsif’s Court, Tirukoilur. P.W.1 (Ponnammal) complainant in

this case, is an unmarried Brahmin woman aged thirty years and the statement of the petitioner in his plaint that she is the

concubine of P.W.2 is clearly defamatory. This is not disputed.

The facts mentioned in ground No. 7 as reasonable grounds for the belief of the petitioner that P.W.1 (Ponnammal) was

the concubine of P.W.2 Namasivaya Odayar were considered by the Courts below which negatived the contention of

the petitioner. They found that P.W.1 was an unmarried Brahmin girl and not a concubine of P.W.2 (Namasivaya

Odayar). It appears from the judgments of the Courts, below that the petitioner relied on Exception 1 to section 500,

Indian Penal Code. In fact, paragraph 12 of the appell