PANCHANAND JHA Vs. SURENDRA MISRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon an application filed by one Panchanand Jha 'alias' Panchu Jha, this Court issued a rule upon the opposite party, who are three in number, to show cause why proceedings in contempt should not- be drawn up against them. This rule has been heard today. The first two opposite party are the editor and the printer and publisher, respectively, of a newspaper called 'Rashtravani', printed at the 'Navshakti Press in Patna, and the third opposite party is one Raghunandan Kunwar, a member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the application are shortly these. An occurrence had taken place on the night between the 21st and 22nd September, 1953, in village Dayalpur at the base of one Bhagwat Babu, in the course of which a man named Krishna Bhagwan Thakur had been caught and both his hands had been tied up and chopped off with a garassa. On the next morning, that is, on 22-9-1953, Krishna Bhagwan Thakur, on his way to Bhagalpur gave his statement before the Assistant Sub-Inspector of the Railway Police at Bihpur Station, and on the same day later, he made a dying declaration which was recorded at the Bhagalpur, Hospital. It appears, that the petitioner, Panchanand Jha, along with other accused, was charged with various offences, and the accused, by an order dated 26-12-1953, were committed to take their trial before the Court of Session.

(3.) On 31-3-1954, Raghunandan Kunwar, opposite party No. 3 issued a statement in Hindi, and it was published in the newspaper called 'Rashtravani', in its morning edition of 2-4-1954. It is this statement which gave rise to the application filed in this Court for proceeding against the opposite party for contempt of Court. It is alleged on behalf of the petitioner that, by issuing this statement, Raghunandan Kunwar, and, by publishing it in the newspaper, the editor and the printer and publisher ought to be held to have created an atmosphere of prejudice against the petitioner, and to have generally prejudiced mankind against the petitioner so much so that an atmosphere has been created in which it will be impossible for the petitioner to get unprejudiced witnesses in his favour.