STATE Vs. KAMLA RAM NAUTIYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICES were issued to Kamla Ram Advocate, Vidya Sagar Nautiyal, Maya Ram Ratauri, Udel, a communist M. L. A. of Banaras, Yogendra Sharma, editor, Janyug, New Delhi, Kamesh Sinha, Publisher, Janyug, New Delhi and Radha Krishna Kukreti Editor. 'naya Zamana, Dehradun to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of Court.

(2.) TWO criminal cases, Nos. 241 of 1967 and 246 of 1967, against V. K. Agarwal, clerk of the Assistant Engineer, P. W. D. . Uttar, Kashi, under Section 8 (7) of the Essential Commodities Act and under Section 465, Penal Code were registered on 21-9-67 and 25. 9. 67. The charge sheets were issued by the Investigating Officer on 10-10-67, in both the eases, and they have been pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Bhatwari, district Uttar Kashi since 25. 10-67 and 6. 11. 67 respectively. The aforesaid cases had been registered on the reports made by Kamla Ram Nautiyal, Secretary of the Communist Party of Uttar Kashi. It was alleged by V. K. Agarwal that Kamla Bam Nautiyal had delivered speeches in Hanuman Chowk, Uttar Kashi on 80. a. 67, 23-10-67, 5 11. 67 and 20-11-67. He gave extracts from the aforesaid speeches delivered by Kamla. Bam Nautiyal and contended that they contained matter which amounted to contempt of Court. A notice was issued on behalf of the District Communist Party of Uttar Kashi in which a reference was made to the aforesaid oases. ' The date of the publication of the aforesaid notice is not clear from the record. The 'naya Zamana' dated 7. 10-67 carried the report of a speech delivered by K. R. Nautiyal in which reference was made to the aforesaid cases. Again on 5-11-67 the "jan-Yug" published an article by opposite party Vidya Sagar Nautiyal which made reference to the aforesaid cases.

(3.) IT is not possible for me to place reliance on the extracts of speeches which were said to have been delivered by K. B. Nautiyal on the aforesaid dates as mentioned by the complainant V, K. Agarwal, There is nothing on the record to show that the aforesaid extracts are true and they were part of the speeches which were in fact delivered by K. B. Nautiyal. It was however admitted by the learned Counsel for the opposite parties that the impugned matter which appeared in the 'naya Zamana' and the 'jan Yug' was correct and it was not denied that it contained matters which were spoken or written by the opposite parties concerned.