SATYAWAN ACHARYA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, Satyawan Acharya, was the manager of a press situate in Colonelgunj, Allahabad. On 28 January 1933, the officer in charge of police station Colonelgunj, visited the place and found a certain document in the course of printing, in the sense that the matter had been composed and was put in galleys. The press had not under Section 15, Press Emergency Powers Act, 23 of 1931, obtained the sanction of the Magistrate for publishing a news sheet.

(2.) The applicant was therefore prosecuted under Section 18 of the same Act, the charge against him being that he was abetting the making of a news sheet. News sheet has been defined in Section 2, Clause 6 as meaning any document other than a news paper containing public news or comments or public news or any matter described in Sub-section 1, Section 4. There is no controversy before me that the intended document was a news sheet within the meaning of Section 2, Clouse 6, but what has been strenuously argued is that the stage at the time of the police search was the stage of preparation or attempt only inasmuch as the composed matter was in the galley only and no proof had been taken out and it became necessary for the Police Officers in order to tender exhibits in Court to get the composed matter actually printed.

(3.) This contention has been repelled by the Courts below and the learned Judge is of the opinion that all persons who perform any one of the acts which contribute towards the final result should be considered as having made the news sheet. He then goes on to discuss the meaning of the word "document" and as that word has not been defined in the Press Emergency Act, help was taken by resort to the definition of document in Section 29, Indian Penal Code, and Section 3, Evidence Act. I am in agreement with the Court below that when the word "document" has not been defined in the Press Emergency Act itself except by saying that it includes also any printing, drawing or photograph or other visible representation, the definition of the word as contained in the Indian Penal Code and the Evidence Act will apply. It is however not necessary for me to go to that extent even; for in the present case the accused was charged only with the abetment of the offence of making a news sheet and it is not possible to argue that the accused who was supervising the printing was not abetting the making of the news sheet.