JOSEPH BAIN DSOUZA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE important question arising for resolution in this writ petition is "whether there are reasonable grounds to hold that cognizable offences under sections 153-A and 153-B of the Indian Penal Code, hereinafter `the Code, have been committed by respondents Nos. 3 and 4 by publishing articles in the news paper `samna which are at Exhs. `a to `i and `k to this petition.

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 in this case is a retired I. A. S. officer. Petitioner No. 2 is a founder Editor of Business India and Business World and a management consultant. They have sought a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to register crime under sections 153-A and 153-B of the Code against respondents Nos. 3 and 4 and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. The relevant facts are as under :

(3.) AFTER the demolition of Babri Masjid, riots took place in Bombay. During that time respondent No. 3 Editor and respondent No. 4 Executive Editor of newspaper `samna published editorials which, according to the present petitioners, prima facie fall within the mischief of sections 153-A and 153-B of the Code. Though the offences under sections 153-A and 153-B of the Code are cognizable offences under the Criminal Procedure Code, still respondent No. 2 the Commissioner of Police, Bombay, did not register the crime against respondents Nos. 3 and 4. The petitioners, therefore, pray for a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 2 to register the crime - and to respondent No. 1 to grant the sanction under section 196 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.