JUDGMENT

Shadi Lal, C J - This is an application under Section 16, Press Ordinance, 2 of 1930, by Mr. P.D. Sharma, the keeper of the Hindustan Times Press and the publisher of the Hindustan Times newspaper, Delhi. The applicant asks the High Court to set aside an order made by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi on 13th August 1930, declaring the security of Rs. 2,000 deposited by him as a keeper of the press, and another security of a like amount furnished by him as the publisher of the newspaper to be forfeited to His Majesty.

2. The ordinance was made by the Governor-General in the exercise of the emergency power conferred upon him by Section 72, Government of India Act, and was published in the Gazette of India on Sunday, 27th April 1930. It appears that Mr. Krishan Das Kohli had, prior to the commencement of the ordinance, made a declaration as the keeper of the Hindustan Times Press under Section 4, Press and Registration of Books Act 25 of 1867, and also a declaration as the publisher of the Hindustan Times newspaper under Section 5 of the said Act. The newspaper was not published on Monday the 28th April, as Sunday is observed as a holiday by the staff of the press and the newspaper; but an issue was published on the 29th April. It was on that very date that the Chief Commissioner of Delhi served a notice on the keeper of the press requiring him to deposit immediately with the District Magistrate of Delhi security to the amount of Rs. 5,000. The notice in question runs as follows:

Whereas under Section 3(3) of Ordinance No. 2 of 1930 (ordinance to provide for the better control of the press) it appears to me that your printing press known as the Hindustan Times Press is used for the purpose or purposes described in Section 4, Sub-section (1) of the aforesaid ordinance.

I hereby require you, Krishan Das Kohli, the keeper of the aforesaid printing press, to deposit immediately with the District Magistrate of Delhi security to the amount of five thousand rupees (Rs. 5,000) in money or the equivalent thereof in securities of the Government of India....

Dated, Delhi: (Sd.) J.N.G. Johnson, 29th April, 1980 Chief Commissioner, Delhi.

3. As a result of this requisition the press could not be used, as laid down by Section 23 of the ordinance, for the purpose of printing any newspaper, book or other document until the deposit of the security by the keeper; and as the keeper failed to comply with the demand, the newspaper could not be printed at the press and consequently ceased publication.

4. After the lapse of about three months the present applicant, Mr. P.D. Sharma, made a declaration on 28th July 1930, as the keeper of the press on depositing Rs. 2,000 as security, and also a declaration as the publisher of the newspaper on furnishing another security for the same amount. On 31st July the newspaper resumed publication with an issue, bearing date, 1st August.

5. On 13th August the Chief Commissioner served a notice in writing on the applicant declaring both the securities furnished by him to be forfeited to the Crown. To this notice he appended a list of the extracts from the newspaper which, in his opinion, ware of the nature described in Section 4, Sub-section (1) of the ordinance.

6. Before examining the extracts, upon which the forfeiture is based, it will be convenient to cite the relevant provisions of Section 4, Sub-section (1). The learned Government Advocate invokes only Clauses (c), (d) and (e) of that Sub-section, which, in so far as they are material to the present case, are in these terms:

(1) Whenever it appears to the Local Government that any printing press in respect of which any security has been deposited as required by Section 3 is used for the purpose of printing or publishing any newspaper, book or other document containing any words, signs or visible representations which are likely or may have a tendency, directly or indirectly, whether by inference, suggestion, allusion, metaphor, implication or otherwise ********