R. P. DUBE, PUBLISHER "NAGPUR TIMES" Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 16th July 1943, the applicant, who is the publisher and printer of the Nagpur Times, published an editorial entitled "Food Situation Prom Afar." As the result of this he received two notices from the Provincial Government one under Section 3(3), as printer, of the Press (Emergency Powers) Act of 1931, and the other under Sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the Act, as publisher in respect of the editorial and in particular two passages cited by the Provincial Government: He first accuses the cultivators for witholding food-grains from the market which is anything but a fact. It would be very easy to prove from the numberless notices received by Malguzars and well-to-do cultivators that the cultivators have been almost legally robbed of the last bushel of any excess of grains they might have. Orders have been served on them to prohibit them from transferring grains to their own lands elsewhere even if they are required to make up their own grain deficits there. It is appreciated that war has made a certain amount of food-scarcity inevitable, but they have always been suspecting that scarcity conditions over and above the unavoidable have been studiously manufactured to corner people into helpless recruitment. Who will deny that India is called on today, to feed many uniformed, unemployed and/ even beggars? Who will deny that the food-scarcity has driven many on the border land into the domain of destitution? That must drive them into recruitment if only to get two meals a day. Not wanting to take any risks with mere canvassing there is every possibility that the Government may have ushered in the scarcity conditions to accomplish what canvassing and even intimidation might have failed to do.

(2.) AS publisher he was called on to deposit a sum of Rs. 1000 as security and as printer Rs. 750. The amounts have been deposited and the applicant now applies under Section 23(1) of the Act to have these orders set aside. It is not denied that he is the publisher and the printer of the paper. This order will cover both applications (Misc. cr. Gases Nos. 185 and 186 of 1943).

(3.) THE short answer to the contention is that neither Section 3(3) nor Section 7(3) constrains the Provincial Government to do anything more than to state or describe the words complained of. The Sub-section lays down that when it appears to the Provincial Government that a document containing any words of the nature described in Section 4, Sub-section (1), has been printed or published a notice is to be given to the printer or publisher stating or describing such words. There is no obligation whatever on the Provincial Government to record its opinion in the notice as to which particular item of Sub-section (1) of Section 4, applies. The contention of the applicant is that no offence has been committed at all and that the article was prompted by a Reuter's telegram which had been published in the issue of the previous day and which runs as follows: The food situation in India again came up in the House of Commons during the question time when Mr. Amery mentioned four factors contributing to the present difficulties These are: (1) Widespread tendency of cultivators to withhold food grains from the market, (2) Larger consumption as the result of increased family income, (3) Hoarding by consumers and others, (4) Weakening of transport system affecting the movement of food from one point to another. Explaining the Government measures to meet the situation, Mr. Amery said that the Government had accepted the various recommendations of the All India Food Conference which met in Delhi recently. It is claimed that the article is nothing more than a reply to the speech of the Secretary of State as summarised in the telegram; It is true that this is prima facie the main purport of the article, but we are concerned with the particular passages cited which involve attacks on the administration of the Provincial Government.