HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
D. N. Sinha, B. N. Banerjee, A. N. Ray, Amaresh Roy, B. C. Mitra
HIREN BOSE - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
Matter 588 Of 1967
Decided On : NOVEMBER 7, 1967
CONTEMPT OF COURT - PUBLICATION OF CONTEMPTUOUS ARTICLE IN NEWSPAPER - APOLOGY TENDERED BY EDITOR - ACCEPTANCE OF APOLOGY - PUNISHMENT IMPOSED.
Fact of the Case:
The editor of a weekly newspaper published an article that was found to be contemptuous of the High Court. The article accused the Chief Justice of being a puppet of the law and of working within the framework of a grinding machine, and it described the Judges generally as being uselessly educated and having no necessity for their existence. The editor later tendered an apology for the article.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the article was contemptuous of the High Court and that the editor was guilty of contempt. The court also held that the apology tendered by the editor was not full, frank, and manly, and that it was offered at a late stage.
Issues: Whether the article published in the newspaper was contemptuous of the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the article was contemptuous of the High Court because it accused the Chief Justice of being a puppet of the law and of working within the framework of a grinding machine, and it described the Judges generally as being uselessly educated and having no necessity for their existence.
Final Decision: The court imposed a fine of Rs. 200 on the editor of the newspaper.
( 1 ) "darpan" is a weekly newspaper, published in the Bengali language. The contemner, Hiren Bose, is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of the weekly, all in one. In the issue of the weekly paper, dated September 15, 1967, there appeared an article headed "demonstration in the High Court: Revolt of the exploited masses against the law in force,"
( 2 ) AT the sitting of the Special Bench on September 19, 1967, then engaged in hearing certain applications against "gheraos" practised by labourers against the management and the managerial staff of certain concerns, Mr. A. K. Dutt, Advocate, brought the Article to the notice of the Special Bench. The Article was also brought to the notice of the Special Bench by Mr. Samiran Sen, Registrar, Original Side of this Court. The article appeared to have been written in the context of an exhibition of 'gherao' inside court room No. 1 and the noisy demonstration held inside and outside the court premises by certain persons. Upon reading the article the Special Bench felt that tthe article was contumacious in nature and suo motu issued a Rule against the Editor calling upon him to show cause why he should not be dealt with or committed for contempt of court. The Rule was made returnable on September 26, 1967.
( 3 ) ON being served with the Rule, the contemner appeared before this Court, on September 26, 1967, and asked for time to use an affidavit showing cause. The matter thereupon adjourned till November 6, 1967, that is to say, until the re-opening of this Court after the long holidays. The contemner did file an affidavit, dated November 4, 1967. In paragraph 2 of the said affidavit he tendered an unqualified apology. In paragraph 3 of the said affidavit, however, he pleaded the following justification for publishing the article :--"i say that the whole purpose and spirit of the article which appeared in the Bengali News weekly 'darpan' on 15th September, 1967 hereinafter referred to as "impugned article" is to focus the attention on the certain inequities of the present legal system which is an inheritance from alien rule and to show that the entire body of law which although has undergone changes from time to time is not in keeping with the aspiration of the people in general or their needs. I feel that the contemporary agitation all over the world is an expression of popular urge for change and the impugned article, if read in its entirety, has expressed its support for such popular urge and was never intended to show any disrespect or disregard to this Hon'ble Court or the judiciary, I did not intend to lower the dignity, honour and authority of this Hon'ble Court or to undermine the confidence of the public in the administra-tion of justice or to lower this Hon'ble Court in the estimation of the public. I did not intend to criticise the Hon'ble Judges of this Hon'ble Court and/or justice administered by them. Since the impugned article is considered to be disrespectful to this Hon'ble Court I sincerely regret and offer my unqualified, unconditional and genuine apology. "mr. Roy Choudhury, learned Counsel for the contemner, also verbally tendered apology on behalf of the contemner in his presence. When we pointed out to him that paragraph 3 of the affidavit contained a justification, which ill-matched with the apology, Mr. Roy Choudhury prayed for an opportunity to use a second affidavit and to withdraw the first one. Thereupon, we adjourned the matter till to-day. The second affidavit has been filed to-day. Paragraph 2 of the second affidavit reads :-"i sincerely and truly regret for writing and publishing the article "high Courtey Bikshov Prachalita Ainer Birud-he Sosita Janasadharaner Bidroha" in the Bengali Newsweekly 'darpan' of the 15th September, 1967, the official translation whereof has been annexed with the Rule and served upon me. I humbly and sincerely tender my unqualified and unconditional apology. "
( 4 ) BEFORE I deal with the affidavit filed and the ap
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.