S A DANGE Vs. STSHEPPARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by six of the accused in the Meerut Conspiracy Case drawing the attention of the High Court to the issue of the Times of India dated 25 February 1930, pp. 11 and 17 and praying that a notice be issued to the Editor and the Printer and Publisher, of the said newspaper to show cause why they should not be convicted for contempt of Court.

(2.) If I had thought it a fit case for issuing notice to show cause, I would have directed this matter to be laid before the Hon ble Chief Justice for the constitution of a Bench of three Judges, as has been done in the past in regard to contempt of Court cases. But as I do not propose to take such a step, I think I have jurisdiction as a single Judge under Chap. 1, Rule 1(14) Sub-clause (b), High Court Rules, to dispose of this application when there is no rule expressly requiring it to be made by a Bench of two or more Judges. Also as the application has been sent through the Superintendent of Jail, I can according to the practice of this Court dispose of the matter in chambers without fixing any date for its hearing. The inherent jurisdiction formerly exercised is now expressly conferred by the Contempt of Courts Act 12 of 1926.

(3.) The issue referred to above reproduced a note issued by the Government of Bombay on the labour position in Bombay City. Objection is taken by the applicants not to any comments made by the Editor on that note but on three specific passages in the note itself which has been printed in extenso in the paper. The accused persons are being tried for an offence,, under Section 121-A, I.P. C, and their grievance is that the publication of this note is likely to prejudice their trial. In para. 6, of their application it is admitted that the subject matter in the trial embraces many subjects and the movements in which the accused took part have become part of history, and: It is impossible for anybody to write about or comment on any labour or allied subjects without in some manner or other, directly or indirectly referring to the issues in this case; and that: the case of the petitioners covers the origin and growth of modern capital going back for centuries, revolutions in all parts of the world, social science, the whole field of sociology and state, the constitution's of several modern forms of state and several countries, including all the historical development of India and its off shoots for the last ten years.