S KAPUR SINGH Vs. L JAGAT NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LALA Jagat Narain has been called on. as Editor, Printer and Publisher of an Urdu daily newspaper published at Jullundur called "the Hind Samachar" to show cause why he should not be punished Under Section 3, Contempt of Courts Act, of 1926 with regard to a leading article which -appeared over his name in the issue of the paper dated 12-3-19.

(2.) THE petnr. in the case is Sardar Kapur Singh, I. C. S. against whom an inquiry has been in progress for several months under the Public Servants Innquiries Act XXXVII (37) of 1850. It so happens that the person who has been appointed by the Govt. as the Comr. under the Act to hold this inquiry is my Lord the Chief Justice of this Ct. The passage in the article in Question which is complained against by Sardar Kapur Singh has been translated in the petn. as follows: "i have to ask one straight question from Doctor Bhargava, Can he point out any Dept. from which work can be taken without bribery? Is he not aware that, when he was opposition Leader, what speeches he used to make and what he used to say about the corruption in the Administration? today this corruption has increased and not decreased. In the times of the Englishmen public servants feared that they might be dismissed. To-day the public servants are emboldened that they have the Ministers and M. L. As, at their back. They work for them, and therefore their corruption can be overlooked. A very clear instance of this is before us. An Ex-Deputy Comr. was suspended by the Punjab Govt. for corruption, a judicial enquiry into this is proceeding. In the defence of this Ex-Deputy Comr. one Minister of the Punjab Govt. and the Chief Whip of the congress Assembly Party have appeared as defence witnesses. The Chief Whip in his deposition has made allegations against the Chief Secretary. The Punjab Govt. is sitting silent like a statue. Under these circumstances if the public servants practice corruption openly, how can they be stopped?

(3.) BEFORE going into the question whether the passage complained against amounts to a contempt of Ct. it is necessary to deal with a preliminary objection which has been raised on behalf of the resp. which is that this Ct. has no jurisdiction to take proceedings against the resp. for contempt of Ct. in respect of a reference in the newspaper to proceedings before the Special comr. appointed to hold the inquiry under the Act into the conduct of the petnr. The argument of the learned counsel for the resp. is that the contempt of Cts. Act. 1926, only gives the H C. the power to deal with contempts of Cts. subordinate to it in the same way as it deals with contempts of itself, and the Ct. of a Comr. appointed to hold an inquiry under the Act of 1850, if indeed it is a ct. is in no sense a Ct. subordinate to the H. C. It is further contended and this point is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petnr.-- that the power of this Ct. to deal with the present alleged contempt is not affected in any way by the fact that the Comr. appointed to hold an inquiry under the Act of 1850 happens to be my Lord the Chief Justice. The first stage in the argument of the learned counsel for the resp. is the contention that the Ct. of the Comrs. as it is convenient to call it, is not even a Ct. but it seems to me that this contention was not meant to be taken very seriously. In fact the only decision cited by the learned counsel for the resp. tended rather to go against him. This was the case 'm. M. Khan v. Emperor' 12 Lah 391. The facts in the case were that some Special Comr. under the Act of 1850 had been appointed to hold an inquiry against Mr. M. M. Khan, an officer in the Irrigation Dept. and the question arose whether the special Comrs. were a Ct. for the purpose of filing a complaint Under Section 195, Cr. P. C. regarding a document put in by M. M. Khan which was thought to be forged. Harrison, J. held that the officers appointed as Special Comrs. under the Act of 1850 to hold an inquiry regarding the conduct of a public servant, constituted a Ct. within the meaning of Section 195, Cr. P. C. and therefore a complaint by them was necessary. The Public Servants Inquiries Act itself seems clearly to indicate that a Comr. or Comrs. appointed under the Act constitute a Ct. as they are given, all the powers of a Ct. regarding the summoning of witnesses and other matters, and the only ground on which the learned counsel lor the resp. could base his argument that the Comr. does not constitute a Ct. was that he can give no final decision, but merely has to draw up a report giving his findings on the charge or charges against the resp. which is to be forwarded to the govt. In my opinion, however, this fact alone is not sufficient to make the Comr. or Comrs. any thing Other than a Ct. and it is to be noted that the definition of Ct. in Section 3, Evidence Act, is very wide indeed as it reads: 'court' includes all Judges and Mags. , and all persons, except arbitrators, legally authorised to take evidence.