STATE Vs. THAKUR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State against an order of acqtiittnl of the respondents who were charged with an offence punishable under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent. No. 1 Thakur Prasad Gupta is a bookseller at Banaras and he owns a press known as the Bombay Prers. Ram Lagan Pandoy respondent No. 3 is the author and writer of a book in Hindi Styled as "Asli Kokshastra." Ganesh Prasad Gupta respondent No. 2 is the publisher of the book which was printed at his press known as the "Swatantra Bhirat Press" of Banaras. On 29-6-1953, upon a raid by the police of the shop of Thakur Prasad Gupta fifty copies of the book were recovered in the presence of this accused. On 5-7-1953 another raid was made by the police on the Bombay Press and the Swatantra Bharat Press and several copies of the book hod been recovered along with ten blocks and certain paper covers of these books containing a nude picture of a woman. In that raid, it was alleged certain books styled as the "Romance of Lust" and four blocks contain- ing obscene matter were also recovered from the Bombay Press. The prosecution alleged that these books, blocks and the picture on the title page were "obscene" and they contained matter punishable under Section 292, I, P. C.

(2.) Thakur Prasad Gupta admitted the recovery of the books known as "Asli Kokshastra" which he contended he had kept for sale. He further admitted that he got the book written by Ram Lagan Pandey with the intention of selling the same. He denied that the "Romance of Lust" was printed at his press. He further denied that copies of this book and four of the offending blocks had been recovered from his press. As regards "Asli Kokshastra" his plea was that it contained no obscene matter and that it was a book relating to the "Vaidyak Shastra'' and was therefore not punishable under Section 292.

(3.) Ram Lagan Pandey admitted the authorship of the book known as "Ali Kokshastra" from pages 1 to 370. But he denied authorship of the remaining part of the book covered by pages 371 to 400. As regards the offending matter contained on pages 222 and 223 of the book, his contention was that they were only translations of a book known as "Rati Ratan Pradipika" which he contended is an authoritative book on the subject. The other offending passages contained at pages 393 to 395 of the book were not claimed by him as not being obscene. As we have already said, his contention in regard to the matter contained in those pages was that he was not the author of it.