The judgment established the interpretation of provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985, and the application of bail regulations under the Act.

M.M.PUNCHHI, J.

1. This petition for bail speedily climbed the ladder of being heard by a Full Bench. To begin with, when the matter came up before me sitting singly, I referred it to a larger Bench considering it to be of importance needing the powers of the Court to grant bail spelled out in view of the special provisions of bail occurring in the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 (hereafter referred to as the Act ). When the matter, under orders of Hon ble the Chief Justice, was placed before a Division Bench consisting of my learned brother D.S. Tewatia J. and myself, we considered that an important question of the interpretation of the provisions of Ss. 3 and 4 of the said Act was involved and thus we referred the case to a Full Bench. It is in this way that the matter has been placed before us. But it has stepped out its parameters as would be seen.

2. The petitioner Sukhdev Singh gives out that he is a Journalist of eminence with more than 20 years of professional career to his credit. He claims to have been associated with leading newspapers/news agencies such as The Indian Press Agency , Blitz , Economic Times and The Daily Tribune . The petitioner is said to be an owner and consultant Editor of a fortnightly English paper by the name of Dignity . The petitioner is further said to be the all-in-all (karta dharta) of the said paper though for the purposes of the Newspapers Central Rules, 1956 one D.S. Gill, an Advocate practising at Ludhiana, is the Printer, Publisher and Editor of the paper. The address of Shri D.S. Gill, Printer, Publisher and Editor, that of the owner of the paper and of the petitioner is the same i.e. 707, Sector 7-B, Chandigarh. Its edition of March 2-15, 1986 bore an article titled as A Dalit View of Punjab Scenario purportedly written by one V.T. Raj Shekhar. The petitioner claims that this article was firstly published by Shri V.T. Raj Shekhar as an Editor in his own Fortnightly paper Dalit Voice of February 16-28, 1986 at Bangalore and that the Dignity reprinted this article in its issue of March 2-15, 1986. It is further claimed that Shri V.T. Raj Shekhar is a Journalist who stands for the cause of Dalits i.e. backward and scheduled castes, etc.

3. The Chandigarh police registered a case against the petitioner under S.124-A/153A, Penal Code and under S.4 of the Act on 12-3-1986. The FIR is primarily based on the questioned article. The petitioner was arrested. He sought bail from the Presiding Officer, Designated Court, Chandigarh, but to no avail. The effort has now been repeated.

4. The petitioner has a right to obtain bail when presumed to be innocent is the clamour of S. Ajmer Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. He maintains that in view of S.7 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, the Editor of the newspaper alone i.e. Shri D.S. Gill was responsible and that the petitioner could not be arraigned as an accused. On the strength of S.1(d) of the said Act, it is asserted that the Editor means the person who controls the selection of the matter that is published in a newspaper and since under S.7 thereof the name of the Editor as printed on a copy of the newspaper is to be treated as sufficient evidence as against the person whose name is printed, he alone can be proceeded against in any legal proceedings; civil as well as criminal, and that the presumption arising against the Editor by necessary implication excludes all others connected with the newspaper. I regret my inability to subscribe to the view S.7 reads as follows :-

"7. Office copy of declaration to be prima facie evidence.- In any legal proceeding whatever, as well civil as criminal, the production of a copy of such declaration as is aforesaid, attested by the seal of some Court empowered by this Act to have the custody of such declaration, or, in the case of the editor, a copy of the newspaper containing his name printed on it as that of the editor shall be held (unless the contr