IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S. Malik, P. N. Harkauli and S. J. Hyder, JJ.
AZIZUL HAQ KAUSAR NAQUVI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Respondents
Criminal Case 2740 Of 1978
Decided On : 01/21/1980
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - Section 95 - Forfeiture of book - Notification issued by State Government - Validity - Grounds of opinion that book contained matter punishable under Section 153A of IPC - Statement of grounds mandatory - High Court to examine grounds mentioned in notification - Interpretation of provisions of old Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and new Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 99A of old Code and Section 95 of new Code - Similarity of provisions - Notification giving clear indication of facts and statements considered by State Government to offend provisions of Section 153A IPC - Detailed reasons for opinion not necessary - Passages considered objectionable by State Government dealt with Omayad Caliphs only and did not contain any reflection against first Caliph of dynasty - Muavia not held in high esteem by Sunni Muslims - Passages couched in mild and dignified language - No criminality under Section 153A IPC - Notification quashed.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the validity of notification issued by State Government forfeiting the book entitled "munaqib-e-Ahle Bait" (In Praise of the Members of the Household of the Holy Prophet) under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, on the ground that the book severely criticized the role of Amir Mauviya who, in the opinion of the State Government, is held in high esteem by the Sunni Muslims.
Finding of the Court:
The notification issued by the State Government under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is liable to be quashed as the passages considered objectionable by the State Government dealt with Omayad Caliphs only and did not contain any reflection against the first Caliph of the dynasty, Muavia, who was not held in high esteem by the Sunni Muslims. The passages were couched in mild and dignified language and did not attract criminality under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code.
Issues: 1. Whether the statement of grounds of opinion that the book contained matter punishable under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code was mandatory under Section 95(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973? 2. Whether the High Court was required to examine only the grounds mentioned in the notification while considering the validity of the notification under Section 96(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973? 3. Whether the notification issued by the State Government under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, was valid?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Yes, under Section 95(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it was obligatory on the State Government to state the grounds of its opinion that the book referred to contained any matter, the publication of which was punishable under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Yes, under Section 96(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the High Court was required to examine only the grounds mentioned in the notification while considering the validity of the notification. 3. No, the notification issued by the State Government under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, was not valid as the passages considered objectionable by the State Government dealt with Omayad Caliphs only and did not contain any reflection against the first Caliph of the dynasty, Muavia, who was not held in high esteem by the Sunni Muslims. The passages were couched in mild and dignified language and did not attract criminality under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed and the notification issued by the State Government under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, was quashed.
( 1 ) THIS is an application tinder Section 96 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 filed by azizul Haq Kausar Naqvi and Inamul Haq Qadri. The applicants call in question the validity of the notification dated June 28, 1977 issued by the State Government forfeiting the book entitled "munaqib-e-Ahle Bait" (In Praise of the Members of the Household of the Holy Prophet ). The said notification has been issued in the purported exercise of powers of the State Government under Section 95 of the said Code. The impugned notification, excluding the Schedule appended thereto, is reproduced below for the sake of convenience :--
"whereas it appears to the State government that the Urdu Book entitled manaquib Able-Bait written by Maulana Azizul Haq kausar Naqvi, Nzami published by 1 Maulvi Inamul Haq Kadri Siraji, 2 Dr. Haji AH Raza qadiri Siraji, 3. Mohammad Yasin Khan, 4. Haji Bar-katullah Nakshband Kadiri Siraji and 5. Abdul Rashid Kadiri Siraji, printed at Ilmi Electric Machine Press, Telia Nala, Varanasi contains matter detailed in the Schedule to this notification which harshly criticises the role of Amir moavia who is held in high esteem by the Sunni Muslims and the language used is likely to hurt the feelings of the Sunni Muslims and lead to greater misunderstanding between Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims and which is thus prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between Shia and Sunni Muslims and which is likely to disturb the public tranquillity and the publication whereof is punishable under Section 153a of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), and on the grounds noted above, the Governor is pleased to declare every copy of the said book and of any other documents containing copies reprints and translation of, or extract from the said book to be forfeited to Government. "
( 2 ) A bare reading of the notification shows that the order of forfeiture was passed by the State government on the ostensible ground that the book severely criticised the role of Amir Mauviya who, in the opinion of the State Government, is held in high esteem by the Sunni Muslims.
( 3 ) THE language employed in the book in its opinion, was likely to hurt the feelings of that sect and was calculated to lead to greater misunderstanding between the Shia Muslims and the Sunni muslims and was thus prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony and goodwill between the members of the two sects, and in consequence was likely to disturb public peace and tranquility. The State Government was further of the opinion that the publication of the said work was an offence punishable under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code.
( 4 ) AZIZUL Haq Kausar Naqvi, the first applicant, is the author of the book and Inamul Haq Kadri is one of its publishers. Both of them have claimed that they themselves belong to the Sunni sect and that the book referred to above does not contain any material which is likely to promote feelings of ill-will between the Sunnis and the Shias. According to them, the publication aforesaid is not likely to disturb public tranquility and it does not amount to an offence punishable under Section 153a of the Indian Penal Code. They have also raised some legal contentions against the validity of the aforesaid notification which shall be considered later in this judgment.
( 5 ) AS already stated, the notification under Section 95, Cr. P. C. is dated June 28, 1977 and was published in the Government Gazette on 23rd July, 1977, The application under Section 96 Cr. P. C. has been moved in May, 1978. Since Sub-section (1) of Section 96 of the Code of Criminal procedure lays down that an application for setting aside an order shall be moved by the person aggrieved by such notification within two months from the date of its publication in the official gazette, the applicants have also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
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.