BAIJNATH KEDIA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Some time in the year 1922 the applicant in this case published the second edition of a Hindi Reader for use in schools. The Reader is composed of six separate text books, numbered 1-6 and those volumes are designed for the instruction of boys of 8 to 13 or 14 years of age. On July 15 this 1924, the Local Government issued a notification by which, under Section 99-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, all copies of Parts 3, 4, 5 and 6 were declared to be forfeited, inasmuch as they contained, in the opinion of the Local Government, seditious matter of the character described in Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Baijnath Kedia, the publisher, was aggrieved by this order, and applied first of all that the Local Government should point out the passages to which they took objection. This application failed, and the matter before ifs to-day is one launched by Baijnath Kedia asking this Court to set aside the order of the Local Government, on the ground that the four Readers Nos. 3-6 inclusive, do not in fact contain any seditious matter.

(3.) Mr. Peary Lal Banerji, who appears for the applicant, criticised at the outset the form of the Government notification, and contended that it did not comply with Section 99A-(b) of the Criminal P. C. inasmuch as the grounds were not set out in the notification. We, however, are precluded by Section 99 D from considering any other point than the question, whether in fact the matters contained in the document were seditious or not, and come within the mischief aimed at by Section 124-A.