SAMBASIVA RAO, J.

( 1 ) I agree with the conclusion drawn by my brothers Kuppuswami and Lakshmaiah, JJ. , in their separate judgments, namely that the petition be dismissed.

( 2 ) THE meaning and scope of Section 124-A, I. P. C. are well known and well established. After the two opinions of my learned brothers, it is unnecessary for me to elaborate the legal position. A mere criticism or denunciation of the Government established by law is not objectionable. Citizens are certainly entitled to express their grievances and to endeavour to get them redressed through lawful means. However, if these attempts or exhortations bring the established Government or tend to bring it into hatred and contempt, they certainly come within the ambit of sedition as stated in Sec. 124-A, I. P. C. The test that should be applied is to find out whether any article or articles intend to have the effect of creating feelings of hostility towards Government and to excite disaffection. I am not referring to the case law on the point since they have been considered at length by my learned brother.

( 3 ) NOW the question is whether the issue of Srujana of May 1974 contains material which causes or tends to ca