Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHBAD
DESAI, BEG, JJ.
Rama Shanker Tewari
Versus
State
Criminal Revn. No. 1033 of 1951
Decided On : 10-02-1954
INDIAN PRESS (EMERGENCY POWERS) ACT, 1931 - SECTIONS 15 AND 18 - CONSTITUTIONALITY - FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION - REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS - EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS - AMENDMENT OF ART. 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION - RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT - APPLICABILITY TO OFFENCES COMMITTED BEFORE AMENDMENT.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was convicted under Section 18 of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, for keeping for sale or distribution unauthorized news sheets. The news sheets contained public news or comments on public news and were therefore unauthorized news sheets as defined in the Act. The applicant challenged the conviction on the ground that the Act was unconstitutional and became void on the passing of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that Sections 15 and 18 of the Act were unconstitutional and became void on 26-1-1950 as infringing provisions of Arts. 19(1)(a) and 14 and not being saved by the provisions in Art. 19(2), either before or after the amendment. The Court further held that the applicant committed no offence by having in his possession the news sheets on 11-6-1950 and that, even if the impugned provisions were valid by virtue of the amendment to Art. 19, the applicant could not be convicted for doing the act before the Article was amended.
Issues: 1. Whether Sections 15 and 18 of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, were unconstitutional and became void on 26-1-1950? 2. Whether the applicant committed an offence by having in his possession the news sheets on 11-6-1950? 3. Whether the amendment of Art. 19 of the Constitution had retrospective effect and could be applied to offences committed before the amendment?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that Sections 15 and 18 of the Act were unconstitutional and became void on 26-1-1950 as infringing provisions of Arts. 19(1)(a) and 14 and not being saved by the provisions in Art. 19(2), either before or after the amendment. The Court reasoned that the impugned provisions provided for prior restraint or censorship on the publication of news sheets and amounted to an infringement of the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a). The Court further held that the provisions were not a law relating to any matter which undermines the security of, or tends to overthrow, the State and therefore could not be saved under Art. 19(2). 2. The Court held that the applicant committed no offence by having in his possession the news sheets on 11-6-1950. The Court reasoned that on 11-6-1950 there was no law, which required a permit for publication of news sheets or which punished keeping for sale or distribution or publication any news sheet published without a permit. The Court further held that the amendment of Art. 19 could not be given retrospective effect to convert the applicant's act into an offence. 3. The Court held that the amendment of Art. 19 did not have retrospective effect and could not be applied to offences committed before the amendment. The Court reasoned that Art. 20 of the Constitution prohibits the conviction of any person for an offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The Court further held that the amendment of Art. 19 was not intended to create new offences and that its only effect was to prevent the laws that had become void from having become void at all.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the application, set aside the applicant's conviction and sentence, and acquitted him.
DESAI, J. :- This is an application in revision against conviction under Section 18 of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act (Act No. 23 of 1931). There is no dispute about the facts; the conviction is challenged on the ground that the Act was unconstitutional and became void on the passing of the Constitution. On a search of the applicants house on 11-6-1950 in execution of a search warrant issued by the District Magistrate of Azamgarh cyclostyled leaflets were recovered. Some leaflets contained the constitution of the United Provinces Khet Majdoor Union, some were entitled "Conspiracy of Great Britain and America to start third world War" and the others contained communist propaganda. The name of the printer was not printed on any of them.
2. Section 15 of the Act lays down that a District Magistrate may
"by order in writing and subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose, authorise any person by name to publish a news sheet, or to publish news sheets from time to time".
A news sheet is defined in S. 2 of the Act to mean "any document other than a newspaper containing published news or comments on public news or any matter described in Sub-Sec. (1) of S. 4".
It was admitted before us by Shri S.N. Dwivedi that the documents recovered from the possession of the applicant contained public news or comments on public news and are news sheets as defined in the Act. It is therefore not necessary for us to deal with S. 4(1).
"Any news sheet oilier than a news sheet published by a person authorised under S. 15 to publish it" is an unauthorised news sheet. Section 18 makes anyone who sells, distributes or keeps for sale or distribution any unauthorised news sheets punishable with imprisonment extending to six months or with fine or with both.
It is conceded that nobody was authorised by the District Magistrate to publish the news sheets that were recovered from the applicants possession. So they were unauthorised news sheets. It is also conceded that the applicant made or kept for distribution or publication the unauthorised news sheets; he was, therefore, liable to be convicted under S. 18 if the Act was validly in force on 11-6-1950. It was contended, however, that it became void under Art. 13 of the Constitution as soon as the Constitution came in force.
3. All laws in force immediately before the commencement of the Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with Arts. 14 to 35, to the extent of such inconsistency, are void under Art. 13. under Art. 19(1)(a) "all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression". As the Article stood on 11-6-50 this freedom was subject to the right of the State to make any law relating to libel, slander, defamation, contempt of court or any matter which offends against decency or morality or which undermines the security of, or tends to overthrow, the State. The Article was amended on 18-6-1951, that is, after the commission of the alleged offence by the applicant. The effect of the amendment is that the freedom of speech and expression is subject to the right of the State to make any law which imposes "reasonable restrictions" on the exercise of the right "in the interests of the security of the State or public order" etc.
It is further laid down in the amendment that no law in force immediately before the commencement of the Constitution which is consistent with Article 19 as amended shall be deemed to be void or ever to have become void on the ground only that being a law which takes away or abridges the freedom, of speech and expression; its operation was not saved by Clause (2) of the Article as originally enacted. In other words, the amendment of Art. 19 has been given retrospective effect. Article 14 enjoins upon the State not to deny any person "the equal protection of the laws". Article 30 is to the effect that"no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an o
AI
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
