DURGAPRASAD PRASANNAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals raise a question under Section 3 (v) Press (Objectionable Matter) Act, 1951. The facts of the two cases which give rise to the appeals are simple and they may be shortly stated.

(2.) THE appellant is the keeper of a press known as Nirbhaya Mudranalaya situate at Vithal Wadi, Ranade Road, Dadar, Bombay 22. He is a publisher of a weekly called "hindu" published in Marathi language, which is printed at the said press. On 5-5-1954 he made a declaration to that effect before the Chief Presidency Magistrate Bombay.

(3.) IN its issue of 19-7-1954, there appeared an article headed "statement of repentant Kamal Vijayalaxmi became Hindu again" under pen, name 'veerketu'. The Commissioner of Police Greater Bombay, having taken the view that the said article was objectionable within the meaning of Section 3 (v) of the Act, filed before the Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, a complaint against the appellant, firstly, as the keeper of the press and, secondly as the publisher of the weekly. Upon the two complaints, a notice was issued to the appellant and upon the evidence adduced before him, the learned Sessions Judge made two orders, by one of which he called upon the appellant to furnish security of Rs. 1500/- and by another he issued a warning to the appellant, holding that the issue of the said weekly "hindu" dated 19-7-1954 contained objectionable matter within Section 3 (b ). Feeling aggrieved by the two orders, the original respondent i. e. the keeper and publisher has filed two separate appeals.