As per case facts, the Petitioner challenged a lower court's cognizance Order in a defamation case filed by the Respondent. The Respondent's complaint alleged defamation by the Petitioner, which was ... filed shortly after the Respondent withdrew an SLP before the Apex Court, where earlier related defamation proceedings between the parties were pending and settlement was encouraged. The Petitioner argued that the Respondent's complaint was delayed, that her actions fell under the 'good faith' exception of the relevant defamation Statute, and that the cognizance Order was passed without due application of mind. The question arose whether the complaint was vitiated by delay, if the good faith exception protected the Petitioner, or if the cognizance Order lacked application of mind. Finally, the High Court held that there was no delay, as the complaint was filed promptly after the SLP withdrawal. It ruled that the 'good faith' defense is a matter of evidence for trial, not to be determined at the initial stage, applying this consistently to both parties. The Court also found the cognizance Order to be detailed and well-reasoned, indicating proper judicial application of mind. Thus, the Writ Petition was rejected.