STATE Vs. BISWANATH MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This rule was issued on the editor and publisher (the opposite party) of an Oriya weekly named The Utkal Bharat of Berhampur for contempt of Court on ground that during the pendency of T. R. Case No. 16 of 1953 in the Court of the Munsif Magistrate (1st class) of Aska the said editor published an article in his Weekly dated 19-2-1054 which had a tendency to interfere with the free course of justice. The rule was based on a report submitted to this Court by the Munsif-Magistrate of Aska.

(2.) The unchallenged facts are as follows: On 12-3-1953 one Uchhab Patra of village Chatula, p. s. Gangpur, district Ganjam, filed a complaint in the Court of the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Russelkonda alleging that Gopinath Dora, Krishnamurti Dora and fourteen other persons of his village had committed criminal trespass inside his house on 12-1-53, looted all his moveable properties and burnt a substantial portion of the same after secreting the rest. This highhanded action was said to have been committed on account of previous bitter enmity between the parties. He further alleged that when he gave information about this incident to the Sub-inspector of Police of Gangpur thana, the latter abused him and refused to take any action and that both the Sub- Inspector and the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police of Gangpur thana were against him. The S. D. O. directed local enquiry by a revenue Inspector and on the basis of his report summoned the accused persons for offences under Sections 379, 435 and 448, I. P. C. On 10-6-53, he transferred the case to the file of the Munsif- Magistrate of Aska for disposal. The case dragged on in the usual way in the Court of the Munsif-Magistrate for nearly six months and by 18-2-54, eleven prosecution witnesses had been examined, charge framed under Section 380 I. P. C. against Gopinath Dora, Krushnamurti Dora and others and cross-examination of most of the prosecution witnesses after charge was also completed. The case was then adjourned to 20-3-54 for cross-examination of the remaining two prosecution witnesses namely, P. Ws. 4 and 6. Thus when the case for the prosecution was practically over the impugned article appeared in 'the Utkal Bharat' on 19-2-54. That article is as follows (English translation):

(3.) On 8-5-54, the accused persons of that case filed a petition before the Munsif- Magistrate alleging contempt had been committed -by the publication of the said article in 'The Utkal Bharat'. The Munsif-Magistrate then submitted his report to this Court for necessary action against the editor and publisher of the said Weekly and on 14-5-54 he delivered judgment in that case convicting the accused persons under Section 380, I. P. C. and sentencing them to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- each.