Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
M. C. Desai, J.
ABDUL HAKIM - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Criminal Revn. 1309 Of 1958
Decided On : 10/06/1959
PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT - SECTION 3, 12 - COPYRIGHT ACT - SECTION 7 - Interpretation of provisions related to printing and publishing of books - Distinction between printing and publishing - Requirements for imprint on books - Liability of printer and publisher for non-compliance.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, Abdul Hakim, printed a series of books called Rahmat-e-Islam, which were substantially similar to the Abr-e-Rahmat series published by Rai Saheb Ram Dayal Agarwala. The Rahmat-e-Islam series did not bear the name of the printer or the place of printing, and the name of the publisher was given as "Kutubkhana Islamia" instead of Aman Ullah, the actual publisher. Both applicants were convicted under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act for printing and publishing the Rahmat-e-Islam series in violation of Section 3 of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the applicant, Abdul Hakim, committed the offence of Section 12 by printing the Rahmat-e-Islam series without printing his name and the place of printing, as required by Section 3. However, the court found that the applicant did not commit any offence under Section 12 in respect of Rahmat-e-Islam II and Rahmat-e-Islam III, as the imprint on the inner cover of the books complied with the requirements of Section 3. The court also held that the applicant, Aman Ullah, could not be convicted under Section 12 for publishing the Rahmat-e-Islam series, as Section 3 does not regulate the act of publishing.
Issues: 1. Whether the applicant, Abdul Hakim, committed the offence of Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act by printing the Rahmat-e-Islam series without printing his name and the place of printing? 2. Whether the applicant, Abdul Hakim, committed any offence under Section 12 in respect of Rahmat-e-Islam II and Rahmat-e-Islam III? 3. Whether the applicant, Aman Ullah, could be convicted under Section 12 for publishing the Rahmat-e-Islam series?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the applicant, Abdul Hakim, committed the offence of Section 12 by printing the Rahmat-e-Islam series without printing his name and the place of printing, as required by Section 3. The court reasoned that Section 3 requires the printer to print his name and the place of printing legibly on the book, and the applicant failed to do so. 2. The court held that the applicant, Abdul Hakim, did not commit any offence under Section 12 in respect of Rahmat-e-Islam II and Rahmat-e-Islam III, as the imprint on the inner cover of the books complied with the requirements of Section 3. The court reasoned that the whole of a volume printed by one man at one place is a book, and if the names of the printer and the place of printing are printed legibly at any place of it, Section 3 is fully complied with. 3. The court held that the applicant, Aman Ullah, could not be convicted under Section 12 for publishing the Rahmat-e-Islam series, as Section 3 does not regulate the act of publishing. The court reasoned that Section 3 only regulates the act of printing, and the applicant did not commit any offence under Section 3 by publishing the Rahmat-e-Islam series.
Final Decision: The court maintained the conviction and sentence of the applicant, Abdul Hakim, under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act. The court quashed the conviction of the applicant, Aman Ullah, under Section 12 of the Act.
( 1 ) THE applicant, who has been convicted under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of books Act, is the manager, printer and proprietor of Asrar Karimi Press in Allahabad. Aman ullah applicant in the companion case has been convicted through the same judgment under section 7 of the Copyright Act and Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act.
( 2 ) IN 1944-45 a firm in Allahabad, known as Rai Saheb Ram Dayal Agarwala, carrying on the business of publishing, printing and selling books, got a series of books known as Abr-e-Rahmat compiled by one Khan Saheb Chhotey Khan and got them approved by the Islamia Maktab committee of Uttar Pradesh for use in Islamia Maktabs in the State. The series consists of a primer called Abr-e-Rahmat Primer and three volumes called Abr-e-Rahmat I, Abr-e-Rahmat II and Abr-e-Rahmat III. Chhotey Khan transferred his copyright in the series to the firm which now holds absolute copyright in it. The series was printed in Shanti Press at Allahabad, the manager of which is Habib Ullah. In May, 1955, Habib Ullah came across a primer of the same series published by the applicant in the companion case as proprietor of Kutubkhana Islamia and asked him how he published it. The applicant apologised and surrendered to him all copies of the spurious primer. Subsequently he published another series of books called Rahmat e-Islam consisting of four volumes, one called Rah-mat-e-lslam Primer and the remaining called Rah-mat-e-lslam I, Rahmat-e-Islam II and Rahmat-e-Islam III. The contents of the primer and of each of the three volumes were almost the same as those of the Abr-e-Rahmat series. The Rahmat-e-lslam series was of the same design and get-up as the Abr-e-Rahmat series and the arrangement of the lessons was exactly the same. This series was printed at Asrar Karimi Press of the applicant. Habib Khan purchased rahmat-e-Islam Vols. I, II and III from Aman Ullah and then a search was made of the Asrar karimi Press from which vendlike forms and printed material of Rahmat-e-lslam series were recovered, and of the Kutubkhana Islamia from where printed copies of the series were recovered. In the Rahmat-e-lslam primer the title of the primer is given as "abr-e-Rahmat" and though it was published by Aman Ullah and printed in Asrar Karimi Press the cover contains the imprint that it was printed by K. B. Agarwal at Shanti Press and was published by R. S. Ram Dayal agarwal. All the lessons of the Abr-e-Rahmat are copied out in the spurious primer. Rahmat-e-Islam Vol. I is almost a copy of Abr-e-Rahmat Vol. I. The outer cover of rahmat-e-lslam II is an exact copy of the outer cover of Abr-e-Rahmat II, while the inner cover contains the name "rahmat-e-lslam" and most of the lessons are practically the same as in abr-e-Rahmat II, the outer cover of Rahmat-e-Islam III bears the name "abr-e-Rahmat" while the inner cover bears the name "rahmat-e-Islam, and its contents are exact reproduction of the contents of Abr-e-Rahmat III with or without minor variations.
( 3 ) AMAN Ullah has been convicted by the Courts below under Section 7 of the Indian Copyright act and both the applicants have been convicted under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act. The conviction under the Press and Registration of Books Act is based upon the fact that the primer of the Rahmat-e-Islam series does not bear the names of the printer and the publisher.
( 4 ) THERE is no dispute about the facts which are fully proved. The conviction of Aman Ullah under the Copyright Act has not been assailed before me; it is correct and is maintained along with the sentence. Both the applicants challenge their convictions under the Press and registration of Books Act. Section 3 of the Act lays down that "every book or paper printed. . . . . . shall have printed legibly on it the name of the printer and the place of printing and. . . . . the name of the publisher and the place of publication". "book" is defined in Sectio
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
