VISHNU GANGADHAR KETKAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 23(7) of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, by the keeper of the "Lokasangraha Press" at Poona to set aside the order of the Provincial Government requiring the applicant to deposit Rs. 2,000 as security under Section 3(5) of the Act. The demand for security was made as it appeared to the Government that certain passages in a book written in Marathi language by Section L. Karandikar called "Savarkar Charitra", i. e. the life of Mr. Savarkar, and printed in the petitioner's press fell under Clauses (a) and/or (b) of Section 4(1) of the Act, There are. in all twenty three such passages which are alleged to incite to or encourage or tend to incite to or encourage, the commission of any offence of murder or any cognizable offence involving violence under Clause (a) or directly or indirectly express approval or admiration of any such offence, or of any person, real or fictitious, who has committed or is alleged of represented to have committed any such offence under Clause (b). The petitioner, however, relies on expln. (1) to Section 4(1) which says that no expression of approval or admiration made in a historical or literary work shall be deemed to be of the nature described in that sub-section unless it has the tendency described in Clause (a). If the book falls under this Explanation, Clause (b) would not apply, and the only thing we have to see is whether it has the tendency described in Clause (a). It is, therefore, necessary to consider that question first. The book must be either historical or literary if it is to fall under the Explanation. Mr. Dharap for the petitioner has urged that it is both ; it is not merely a biography of Savarkar but it also purports to be a history of the revolutionary movement in which he took part from 1905 to 1909, and it is moreover a work of literary merit written in chaste language and attractive style. The author, Mr. Karandikar, is an M. A. , LL. B. , and a Member of the Bombay Legislative Assembly. The book is a bulky volume containing more than 600 pages and divided into sixteen chapters, with an introduction by Mr. N. C. Kelkar. It purports to be a narration of the life of Savarkar, and the author says in his preface that later on he will write about what he calls the exposition of his views.

(2.) THE learned Advocate General has contended on the other hand that the book is not a historical work but the biography of a living person describing in detail several incidents of murder of Government officials which it was not necessary to do in a biographical work. He has further urged that as stated in the introduction of the book there was armed resistance to the Government going on at the time! when this book was published in May 1943 and that therefore it was a description of the initial stages of the same revolutionary movement against the Government which continues up to this day. We have got before us the original book and after going through its contents we have no doubt that it is a literary work containing a historical review of the revolutionary1 movement in which Savarkar took part when he was in England. It is true that the biography is of a living person, but it contains a narrative of the revolutionary movement in existence about thirty-five years ago which has now passed into history. Savarkar was no doubt a principal figure in that movement, but that particular movement has already ceased to exist as the persons who took part in it are either dead or have changed their revolutionary cult. We have no materials to hold that the alleged revolutionary movement of violence and sabotage in 1943 is such a continuation of the movement of 1905 to 1909 that the latter can be regarded as pertaining to current events and not to those of history. In our opinion, therefore, the book is a historical work and not merely a narrative of current events. While describing Savarkar's part in it the author has purported to give a historical description of the events mostly without expressing his own opinion on their merits. It does not appear to us to be a one-sided picture but the author has also narrated the opinions of some eminent persons living at that time who thought it to be a misguided and harmful movement. THE book also seems to us to possess literary style and to be a contribution to Marathi literature. We are, therefore, of the opinion that it falls under expln. (1) to Section 4, Sub-section (1).

(3.) IT is next contended by the learned Advocate General that if there is any expression of approval or admiration for an offence, such expression by itself must be taken to have the tendency to encourage murder and violent crimes. He relies upon a decision of the Nagpur High Court in Bapuji v. C. P. Local Government [1933] A. I. R. Nag. 148 F. B. IT was held in that case that a particular poem reciting that a person sentenced to death was a hero and that the drum of his fame should reverberate in the whole universe would have the tendency to encourage the commission of violent offences. We doubt whether the learned Judgesintended to lay down a general proposition that in all cases of admiration or approval of an offence or offender, there must be a tendency to encourage violent offences. But if they do, we respectfully differ from them. Otherwise Expln. (1) which protects a historical or literary work would be rendered nugatory. We have to look to the circumstances in each case in judging such a tendency, viz. the purpose of the work, the time at which it was published, the class of people who would read it, the effect it would produce in their minds, the context in which the objected words appear, and the interval of time between the incidents narrated and the publication of the work.