SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
25th September, 1961
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., A.K. SARKAR, K.C. DAS GUPTA, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR AND J.R. MUDHOLKAR, JJ.
1. Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. and others (In Petition No. 331 of 60) and 2. B. N. Sarpotdar and another (In Petitions Nos. 67 and 68 of 61), Petitioners
Versus
Union of India (In all the three Petitions), Respondent. 1. Shantilal Harjivan Shah and others 2. Printers (Mysore) Private Ltd. 3. Labchand and others 4. B. N. Sarpotdar and another 5. Firm Tamil Nadu and 6. D. S. Potnis and another, Interveners (In Petn. No. 331 of 60).
Petitions Nos. 331 of 1960 and 67 and 68 of 196l.
Advocates appeared
M/s. G. S. Pathak and S. T. Desai, Sr. Advocates (M/s. R. Ganapathy Iyer and S. S. Shukla Advocates and Mr. G. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate of M/s. Gagrat and Co., with them, for Petitioners; Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India and Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate, (M/s. R. H. Dhebar and T. M. Sen, Advocates, with them), for Respondent; M/s. N. P. Nathwani and J. B. Dadachanji, Advocates and M/s. S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain and Co., for Intervener No. 1; Mr. J. B. Dadachanji, Advocate and M/s. S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain and Co., for interveners Nos. 2 and 6; Mr. K. R. Chaudhuri, Advocate, for Intervener No. 3; Mr. S. T. Desai, Senior Advocate (Mrs. E. Udayarathnam and Mr. S. S. Shukla, Advocates, with him), for Intervener No. 4; Dr. W. S. Barlingay, Senior Advocate, (Mr. A. G. Ratnaparkhi, Advocate, with him), for intervener No. 5. Mr. S. T. Desai, Sr. Advocate (Mrs. E. Udayarathnam and Mr. S. S. Shukla, Advocates, with him), for Petitioners (In Petitions Nos. 67 and 68 of 61).
-held if law is directed against circulation of news paper it would be direct interference with freedom of speech and expression in Art 19 (1) (a). This freedom is of paramount importance under democratic constitution.
-held, for attainment of that object, law cannot make inroads on the right of other newspapers which is guaranteed under ARTICLE 19(1) (a).
-see decision in Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305=(1962) 2 SCJ 400=(1962) 3 SCR 842.
Judgment
MUDHOLKAR, J. : A matter of far-reaching importance affecting the freedom of the press is raised in these three petitions wherein the constitutionality of the Newspaper (Price and Page) Act, 1956, and the Daily Newspaper (Price and Page) Order, 1960, is questioned. 2. The first petition is by a private limited company carrying on business inter alia of publishing daily and weekly newspapers in Marathi named "Sakal" from Poona and by two persons who are the only shareholders in that company. The second and third petitions are preferred by two readers of "Sakal" who also challenge the constitutionality of the Act. Certain parties were allowed to intervene. They supported the Union of India, the respondent in all these petitions and sought to uphold the validity of the Act and the Order. In view of the common argument adduced before us it would be convenient to deal with the first petition only in full. 3. The newspaper "Sakal" was started in the year 1932 and it is claimed that it has a net circulation of 52,000 copies on week days and 56,000 copies on Sundays in Maharashtra and Karnataka and as such plays a leading part in the dissemination of news & views and in moulding public opinion in matters of public interest. 4. The daily edition of the newspaper contains six pages a day for five days in a week and four pages on one day. This edition is priced at 7 nP. The Sunday edition consists of ten pages and is priced at 12np. About 40 per cent of the space in the newspaper is taken up by advertisement matter and the rest is devoted to news, articles, features, views etc. It is claimed on behalf of the petitioners that one of the special features of the newspaper is coverage of foreign news and despatches on foreign affairs. It is claimed on behalf of the petitioners that this paper is not aligned with any political party and that upon controversial questions the public look up to it for impartial appraisement of the issues involved and for guidance. 5. Briefly stated the effect of the Act and of the impugned Order is to regulate the number of pages according to the price charged, prescribe the number of supplements to be published and prohibit the publication and sale of newspapers in contravention of any Order made under Section 3 of the Act. The Act also provides for regulating by an Order under S. 3, the sizes and area of advertising matter in relation to the other matters contained in newspaper. Penalties are also prescribed for contravention of the provision of the Act or Order. 6. We may mention here that in the year 1952 the Government of India appointed a Press Commission for enquiring into a large number of matters concerning the Press and one of the recommendations of the Commission was to enact a law such as the one impugned before us. This law is alleged by, the respondent to have been made to give effect to that recommendation, Both the sides place reliance upon the findings of the Press Commission and have invited us to accept these findings, though not necessarily the recommendations. 7. The petitioners point out that the total number of pages which Sakal" gives to its reading public on six days in a week is 34 and that, as a result of the impugned Order they will either have to raise its price from 7 nP. to 8 nP. per day or to reduce the total number of pages to 24. They further point out that while at present all newspapers can issue any number of supplements as and when they choose, under the Order they would be prevented from doing so except with the permission of the Government. According to them the Order would have the effect of either compelling them to increase the price or to reduce the number of pages of practically every newspaper in the country as also of preventing them from publishing supplements without extraneous restrictions which they are able to do at present. 8. It is the petitioners case that the impugned Act and the impugned Order are pieces of legislation designed to curtail and wh
Relied on : Bhushan v. State of Delhi
Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd. v. Union of India
Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras
Dwarkadas Shrinivas v. Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.