TMI Blog1959 (3) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es the question of the constitutional validity of section 99-A. 3. The main theme of the argument of the counsel for the petitioner in support of both the petitions is that Section 99-A of the Criminal Procedure Code offends Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, which guarantees to the citizens freedom of expression. The stress of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that any law, which takes away or even curtails any of the freedoms enshrined in Article 19 is void and should, therefore, be struck down. 4. It is contended that the power conferred by that section could be used by the executive in such a way as to interfere with the right of freedom of expression of a citizen and thus destroy the protection afforded under Article 19. The crucial point for consideration is whether there is any repugnancy between Article 19 of the Constitution and Section 99-A Criminal Procedure Code. 5. We will presently show that the impugned section does not in any way violate Article 19 (1) (a). The right now claimed is created by Article 19 and is not independent of it and is subject to the limitation imposed by it and as such is not an unrestricted or unqualified r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tte, stating the grounds of its opinion, declare every copy of the issue of the newspaper containing such matter and every copy of such book or other document to be forfeited to Government and thereupon any police officer may seize the same wherever found in India and any Magistrate may by warrant authorise any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector to enter upon and search for the same in any premises where any copy of such issue or any such book or other document may be or may be reasonably suspected to be. 8. It is seen that this section does not take away the right to write and publish books. People are at liberty to write books without offending deliberately the religious sentiments of the other citizens who are as much entitled to certain freedoms as the petitioner himself. Section 99-A does not place a total prohibition on the exercise of the fundamental right guaranteed to a citizen. It only empowers the Executive to take action in the interest of public order etc., in the eventualities mentioned therein. Surely, no citizen could claim a right to insult the religion or religious beliefs of another section of the population. The right which one citizen cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterests of is of wide connotation. So, any law penalising activities which have a tendency to cause public disorder is within (the scope of) authorised limits. The impugned section therefore, comes within the range of clause 2 or that Article. 11. A similar contention was repelled by the Supreme Court in Ramjilal Modi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, . There, the question posed was whether Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code was obnoxious to Article 19 of the Constitution. The answer was in the negative. Their Lordships have observed that Article 1972) only punishes an aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. In the course of the judgment, the learned Chief Justice observed : -- It cannot be predicated that freedom of religion can have no bearing whatever on the maintenance of public order or that a law creating an offence relating to religion cannot under any circumstances be said to have been enacted in the interests of public order. This pronouncement of the Supreme Court applies equally to Section 99-A Criminal Procedure Code since it is only a matter that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Further, in deciding whether a particular restriction is reasonable or not, the Court should take into account the character of the right alleged to have been violated and the underlying purpose of the restriction imposed, the extent and urgency of the evil sought to be remedied thereby, the disproportion of the Imposition and the prevailing condition at the time etc. Vide : State of Madras v. V.G. Row, . We feel that the restriction imposed by Section 99-A is not disproportionate to the evil sought to be remedied. For these reasons, we hold that Section 99-A is not hit at by Article 19 of the Constitution and its validity cannot be impeached. 14. It was next faintly argued that this legislation also interferes, with the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property within the ambit of Article 19 and as such infringes Clause (f) of that Article. We cannot accede to this contention. Section 99-A does not seem to have any impact on Clause (f). Assuming that it has any such effect, it is protected by Clause (5) of that Article, as such an enactment is necessary in the interests of the general public. By that as it may, the law in dispute is protected by Clause (2), as it is conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f it in the official gazette and no personal service is generally contemplated. Therefore, Section 99-A is not open to attack on that ground. 17. Further, before the order is put into effect, the order should be communicated to the person concerned, be it the author, the printer or the publisher and that would enable him to move the High Court under Section 99-B. It is contended that the Government could deprive a party of the right of application by postponing the actual forfeiture of the book. We do not think that there will be any justification for attributing evil designs or mala fides to the Government. It cannot be assumed that Government will throw obstacles in the way of the exercise of the right of application derived from the sub-section. The remedy provided by Sub-section D (sic) is a very effective one and gives an opportunity to have the legality of the order tested in the High Court. So Section 99-A cannot be challenged even on that account. 18. It was alternatively contended that the order in dispute does not comply with the terms of Section 99-A. It is said that it is vitiated by the failure of the State Government to state the grounds of its opinion. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the unscientific, un-historical and unrationalistic nature of the Bible and that if any of the passages therein have the effect of insulting the religion or religious beliefs of Christians, that docs not attract the applicability of Section 99-A unless it is found that the petitioner had deliberately and maliciously done it. The petitioner had no intention at all to insult in any way the Christian religion, his only object in writing the book being to examine the Bible and its literature from a rationalistic point of view. The book in question was a dispassionate and scientific study of the Bible and the author as a rationalist had applied reason to the investigation of phenomena, proceeded the argument. 20. We do not think that we can accept this proposition. It is true that each and every insult to the religion or religious feelings of a sect which arc unintentional would not bring the matter with in the ambit of Section 99-A. Sometimes it may be offered unwittingly or carelessly and without any deliberate or malicious intention. It is only insults to religion or religious beliefs that are deliberately and maliciously made that would bring into play Section 99-A Criminal Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y prove their spurious nature. A person by name Jesus was reported to have been born out of an adulterous intercourse between his mother Mary and a Greek soldier in the Roman Army. The conception of the Holy Ghost was a later creation by interested followers to purify the sinful birth of Jesus. The virginity of Mary and her subsequent apotheosis were absurd and unwarranted. The story of resurrection is also untrue and improbable. Christianity is therefore a false and fabulous religion. Its early propagation is steeped in bloodshed and it is of little credit to the teachings of Christ. The Bible justifies such barbarities. The Christian Moral Code as thought in the Bible is contrary to human nature and natural evolution. The growth of fascism in European countries is entirely due to the previous propagation and belief in the stupid and extraordinary teachings of the Christian religion. 23. These passages clearly show that the petitioner is vilifying in grossest terms the principles and tenets of Christianity. There are other passages in the book which though not so objectionable as the above are calculated to produce the same effect. It is clear that he bad not spared even the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er countries, to which no exception was taken and there was no reason why a book of his embodying similar concepts should be confiscated. We do not think that weight could be given to this argument. 26. Free thinking does not involve freedom to make scurrilous attacks on the religion and religious beliefs of other sects with impunity. It is not free-thinking to abuse and insult other religions. Further, the method find the manner of discourse on a particular topic also matters very much. All the citizens of India are guaranteed freedom of religion and freedom of conscience by our Constitution and each one has a right to pursue his own way of attaining salvation, unhampered and without interference from others. It is the duty of the State to create such a climate as would enable every one of its citizens to exercise freedom of religion and conscience. Section 99-A of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code are only legislative recognition of the power of the State to take action for the purpose of affording such protection to all its citizens. If the deduction that any citizen could intentionally wound the religious beliefs of others in the name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contradictions may be easily noticed by the readers, and, therefore, there is no ground for applying the section to this part also. It was contended that the two parts constitute two books because they are bound in two volumes and that part of it which does not contain matter of the nature contemplated by that section, should he excluded from the purview of the order confiscating the books. We do not think we can accept these theories. First of all, it should be noted that the second part is a vituperative commentary on the Bible. Some of the teachings and tenets of Christianity are described as Sriranga Neethulu, which conveys the idea that the teachings are ludicrous ones. Further, in order to gather the effect a book, is likely to produce on the mind of the reading public, it should be read as a whole. It cannot be postulated that the operation of Section 99-A, Criminal Procedure Code should necessarily he confined to isolated parts of the book, which come within the mischief of that Section. All that the section emphasises is that the book should contain matter which is deliberately and maliciously intended to outrage the religion or religious beliefs etc. It does n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enience and whims and fancies of the publisher whether a particular book is to be in one volume or in two volumes. So the question whether a particular part or volume constitutes a separate book does not turn upon how they are bound. Regard must be had to the contents of the book. If each volume deals with a distinct subject, it forms a book by itself. The condition is not satisfied in the instant case. Both the parts together discuss the Bible and expose its hollowness and pretension and point out the alleged incongruities, contradictions and the immoral nature of the doctrines contained therein. The first part anticipates the contents of the second part. 31. The petitioner did not treat them as two separate and independent books in his petition. Through out the petition, he proceeds on the assumption that the two parts make one book. In paragraph 7 of the affidavit of the petitioner it is alleged that there was no demonstration against the publication of his work and again he talks of the book 'Bible Bandaram' in the same paragraph. In the next paragraph he also refers to the two parts as one book in several places. Thus, the petitioner himself did not treat them ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocuments containing copies, re-prints, translations of, or extracts from the said book arc forfeited to the Government. 35. We have set as a special Bench of three Judges to hear the application as required by Section 99-C of the Code. Along with this application, the applicant has filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution impugning the constitutional validity of Section 99-A. 36. It will be convenient to set out even at the outset the sections of the Code to which reference will have to be made in this opinion: 99-A (1) Where: (a) any newspaper, or book as defined in the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867; or (b) any document, Wherever printed, appears to the State Government to contain any seditious matter or any matter which promotes or is intended to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens of India or which is deliberately and maliciously intended to outrage the religious feelings of any such class by insulting the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, that is to say, any matter the publication of which is punishable under Section 124-A or Section 153-A or Section 295-A of the Indian Penal C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion is within the mischief of that section: 295-A. Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, insults of attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may be extended to two years, or with fine, or with both . The definition of a book in the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, referred to in Section 99-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is as follows: Book includes every volume, part or division of a volume, and pamphlet, in any language, and every sheet of music, map, chart or plan separately printed or lithographed. Before considering the arguments, two obvious but important facts must be noted: One, that the State Government has in its notification not stated the grounds of its opinion as required by the Statute; two, that the notification does not expressly refer to the two volumes of the book which is declared forfeited. 37. In support of his application under the Code and his writ petition, the applicant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he has no animus against any religion in particular, that he is opposed to all religions, that therefore he cannot, if the passages referred to in the Government's counter-affidavit are read in the context of the whole book, be charged with any intention to outrage the religious feelings of Christians, still less of a deliberate and malicious intention of that kind. He has drawn our attention to the fact that one of the passages complained of is an extract from the well-known book of Ernst Haeckel The Riddle of the Universe. find that the other passages are entirely innocuous. He has further argued that even assuming that Section 99-A is not obnoxious to the Constitution and even if it is established that the passages in question are objectionable as being of the nature mentioned in Section 295-A, I. P. C., still the Government's power to forfeit the book is limited to the volume containing the offensive passages and does not extend to so dealing with the second volume. 40. The learned 3rd Government Pleader has, on the other hand, argued that Section 99-A is not open to any Constitutional objection; that the passages clearly evince an intention of the nature ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overnment establishing the satisfaction of the Court that the book forfeited contains objectionable matter of the nature mentioned in Section 99-A. 43. In the second place, there can be, in my opinion, no real question of onus in a case like this where the only material before the Court is the contents of a book and the question that arises for consideration is thus in substance a Question of law. A question of law is to be decided not with reference to any doctrine of onus but on the basis of arguments, the duty to decide in accordance with reason, right and justice being always on the court. It is true that Judges do say occasionally that the burden of establishing a proposition of law is on a particular party; but in saying so, it seems to me they are only adopting a rhetorical device to convey the meaning that they are not satisfied that the propounder is right. 44. It is conceivable however that in a particular case the Government may rely upon some facts to justify its order. It may seek to establish the objectionable intention on the part of the author by reference to other similar productions of his and certain other relevant facts (vide: Sections 14 and 15 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in a particular case be approaching the Court within a few days of his becoming aware of the orders; when, further, he is handicapped by the fact that no grounds of opinion are stated in the order it would be unfair to insist upon his satisfying the court that the book does not contain matter of such a nature. 48. Even if the practical effect of such a view would be only that he would have to translate the whole of the book and give the Court and the other side an adequate number of copies, I should be inclined to hold that the burden to show that the order made is right apart from its obvious duty to establish the intention -- is on the Government. 49. But perhaps in using the word burden in this context, what is meant is the right to begin and the right to reply. If that only is meant the Government ought not to complain because they will have the advantage of opening and reply. I may state however that as a matter of fact the applicant himself began the arguments before us. I, therefore, see no substance in this contention urged on behalf of the Government. 50. I shall now deal with the objection raised by the applicant that Section 99-A of the Code of Criminal Proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spaper etc., which contains words or visible representations insulting or attempting to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any class of citizens of India. Does this power with which the local Govt., is clothed, extend beyond the terms of the respective saving clauses in Article 19 of the Constitution? First I shall consider the right of freedom of expression. If it is proper that a person should be punished for publishing words which outrage religious susceptibilities, then it seems to me to be equally proper that the words so published should not be allowed to be circulated. Any law aimed at destroying such dangerous words must surely in my opinion be deemed to be reasonable. I cannot conceive it as an excessive curtailment of the citizen's freedom of expression, when in the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality any matter which outrages the religious feelings of a class of citizens is wiped out of existence. No man's freedom of expression is prejudiced merely because he cannot deliberately and maliciously outrage the religious feelings of a class of his fellow citizens. I therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he exercise of his right to carry on business. I, therefore, hold that Section 99-A does not infringe any of the rights guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution. 54. It has also been argued that the mode of notification prescribed in Section 99-A and the limitation imposed in Section 99-B whereby the order can be brought before tin's Court only within a period of two months from the date of such notification render the encroachment upon the guaranteed rights unreasonable and place it outside the saving clauses of Article 19 above-referred to. With respect to the mode of notification, although as I have already observed referring to the Supreme Court's decision in , the publicity value of such a notification is not great, still, it seems to me, that having regard to the nature of the power, it can hardly be expected to be exercised only after due notice of not only to the author or publisher but also to a book-seller or indeed any person who may be in possession of copies of the offending newspaper etc. The power vested in the Government to prevent the mischievous consequences that may flow from the circulation of the paper or the book will be rendered almost nugat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter can be thrashed out in the High Court before a special Bench of three Judges. The prejudice if any caused by the non-statement is no more than inconvenience and the applicant can be said at the worst to be somewhat handicapped in the conduct of his defence. But such a non-statement does not, in my opinion, go to the validity of the order. 57. It may however be argued that our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution are wider than those which are conferred by Section 99-D and they may be resorted to. But it seems to me that even so, it would be taking too technical a view of the matter, to set aside the order of forfeiture solely on the ground that the grounds of the Government's opinion are not stated therein, if, as a matter of fact, we find that the book does contain objectionable matter. 58. This brings me to the question as to whether there is material placed before us which enables us to draw the conclusion that the applicant is guilty of deliberate and malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of the Christian community. This cannot be a matter merely of presumption arising from the fact that the Government has forfeited the book. It should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and scientific study of the Bible connected with Biblical literature is inconsistent with the abusive and insulting language in which religious personalities and tenets of the Christian (sic) have been characterized in the pages of the book as would be evident from some of the passages to which a detailed reference will be made hereinafter as typical of the insulting tone and content of the subject-matter of the book. The petitioner may call himself a rationalist and humanist. He may claim that he is not a believer in the Hindu Religion and that the very basis of religion is shocking to his conscience. Whatever the scientific or rationalist motives that might have actuated the petitioner in embarking upon a vituperative and abusive commentary on the Bible, I respectfully submit the intention to outrage the Christian religion and its leading lights and its adherents is apparent from a reading of the book and the publication of the book would certainly come within the four corners of Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code attracting the power of the Government to issue the prohibitory order under Section 99-A of the Criminal Procedure Code..... Whether the book 'Bible Banda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e previous propagation and belief in the stupid and extraordinary teachings of the Christian religion. 3. In view of the above grossly offensive and provocative language used in depicting the Christian Religious beliefs and in painting the birth and character of Jesus Christ in an indecent manner the claim of the petitioner that it is a dispassionate study of religion cannot carry any conviction. On the contrary the petitioner's deliberate Intention to outrage the feelings of the Christians would be evident therefrom and various representations have been received from the Christians and Christian associations, that the book has deeply wounded their religious feelings and sentiments. It is unnecessary to refer to the other portions of the affidavit which do not directly bear upon the important question now under consideration. Speaking for myself I am not prepared to hold that even if the word 'Bandaram' in Telugu carries a disparaging and satirical sense in popular parlance, it follows that it necessarily establishes malice on the part of the author. Disparagement and satire do not in my opinion, necessarily import malice. On the other hand I may make it cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be styled a cynic, a misanthrope, but cannot be characterized as malicious. 62. It would not be out of place in judging the intention of the applicant to compare his words with those of other authors of books in wide circulation all over the civilised world. 63. In Frederic Harrison's book The Creed of a Layman we find the following passage. Reviewing a book entitled 'Essays and Reviews' to which several authors contributed and which he describes as a book which at once repudiates miracles, inspiration. Mosaic history, and the authenticity of the Bible . Harrison observes as follows with reference to one of the essays therein written by Dr. Williams who, to use Harrison's words, is a well-known tutor at Cambridge, who is now vice-principal of a training college for the priesthood and thus adds to the character of vicar, that of in educator of the clergy :-- ............ it subjects the entire scripture to a process which combines that pursued by Niebuhr upon Livy, with that of Wolf upon Homer. In short, the truth of the narrative and the identity of the authors disappear together. It becomes a medley of legend, poetry and oral tradition, compiled, remo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es from Ingersoll's Lectures and Essays, Second series, entitled Some Mistakes of Moses. :-- The real oppressor, enslaver, and corrupter of the people is the Bible. That book is the chain that binds, the dungeon that holds the clergy. That book spreads the pall of superstition over the colleges and schools. That book puts out the eyes of Science, and makes honest investigation a crime. That book unmans the politician, and degrades the people. That book fills the world with bigotry, hypocrisy, and fear. It plays the same part in our country that has been played by Sacred Records' in all the nations of the world. The first five books in our Bible are known as the Pentateuch. For a long time, it was supposed that Moses was the author, and among the ignorant the supposition still prevails. As a matter of fact, it seems to be well settled that Moses had nothing to do with these books, and that they were not written until he had been dust and ashes for hundreds of years. No one pretends that Shakespeare was inspired and yet all the writers of the books of the Old Testament put together could not have produced Hamlet. My own opinion is that General Joshua knew no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mythology; it has been borrowed from order religions, especially Buddhism. Similar myths were widely circulated in India, Persia, Asia Minor, and Greece several centuries before the birth of Christ. Whenever a king's unwedded daughter, or some other maid of high degree, gave birth to a child, the father was always pronounced to be a God, Or a demi-God; in the Christian case, it was the Holy Ghost. Then follows this passage : -- To return to the particular question of the impregnation of the Virgin Mary by the Holy Ghost, we are referred to the gospels of testimony to the fact. The only two evangelists who speak of it, Matthew and Luke, relate in harmony that the Jewish maiden, Mary was betrothed to the carpenter Joseph, but became pregnant without his co-operation, and, indeed, by the Holy Ghost ..........When, therefore, we find in one of them, the gospel of Hicodemus (which is assigned by some scholars to the second century), a statement that Jesus was accused by the Jews of being begotten, in sin -- a statement that is somewhat enlarged by the second century Platonist writer Celsus (as indicated by Origen, Contra Colsum, I-32) into the charge that the mother of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even to offer insults to religion, if such insults are not made with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class, on the twin principles that curbs on freedom of expression are a greater evil than any consequences that may follow me exercise of such freedom and that one must not he afraid of error so long as truth is free to combat it. I may mention that there are some books of Anatole France, the well-known French writer, which contain passages contemptuous of Christianity. Who has not read his famous story, entitled Procurator of Judaea ? Swinburne's well-known Hymn to Proserpine breathes anti-Christian spirit, it is true that present day Rationalists of Europe no longer adopt the violent language of abuse to which the Bible was subjected in the 19th Century but that is only because rationalism has become established there for nearly a century. But new converts to rationalism, like new converts to any religion or cult, are apt to be fanatical and the applicant is obviously so. But fanaticism, however reprehensible, is not malice. 70. To sum up I grant that conditions in our country are different. I grant also that the passag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntention to outrage and that he was actuated by malice : The evidence afforded by the passages considered in the light of the whole of the book cannot, I think, bring home to the applicant any guilty intention. 73. Now, it is also to he remembered that by finding the book as manifesting the necessary intention, we are holding the author guilty of a crime. In holding that Section 295-A Indian Penal Code falls under the reservation made under Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has observed in : -- ........... Section 295-A does not penalise any and every act of insult to or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class of citizens but it penalises only those acts of insults to or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or the religions beliefs of a class of citizens, which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section. It only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volume which causes the offence should be destroyed. But I can think of no conceivable reason why when a book consists of 16 volumes and the offending matter is contained in the 14th volume all the 16 volumes should be forfeited. It seems to me that there is no justification for the State Government exercising any such power either on the ground of commonsense or on the plain meaning of the words of the section. Book is defined in the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, as including every volume, part or division of a volume, and pamphlet, in any language, and every sheet of music, map, chart or plan separately printed or lithographed. (This definition will perhaps have to be token along with the clause above it that this is the meaning of 'book' unless there is something repugnant in the subject or context). This is only an inclusive definition and therefore we must read into it in addition the ordinary meaning of a Book . A hook in its plain and ordinary meaning is in my opinion a separately hound volume. Of course the word also has a larger sense. All Shakespeare's dramas can be referred to as one book when they are contained in a single volume. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o volumes or parts. No copy of the second part or volume has been produced before us by the Government; nor any passages from that volume referred to in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Government. It is not our duty, as I conceive it, to make an order of forfeiture but only to examine the correctness of any such order made by the Government It was suggested at one stage of the argument that the learned 3rd Government Pleader would translate portions of the second volume to show that they also contained passages to which objection could be taken. A translation of some of the passages has been handed over to us after the arguments were closed. But I have excused myself from the trouble of going through them because in my view, apart from the merits of the contention and the infirmities in the procedure adopted by the Government at the hearing of these petitions, it is not the task of this court in the discharge of the statutory duties imposed upon it by Section 99-D to go through a volume in which the Government have failed to discover for themselves any obnoxious matters. Having read through the book, I am not inclined to consider that the assertion of the applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Government is right -- and of course, I do not accept it -- I should hold that Section 99-A would have the effect of imposing an unreasonable restriction on the right of freedom of expression, not to mention the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property, because it would then empower the Government to deal not only with the offending matter or volume containing it but also altogether innocuous material. 78. The result is that in my opinion, this application should be allowed. If my order should prevail, I should be inclined to award the petitioner ₹ 300/- by way of costs of the application. 79. In my opinion, the writ petition need not be separately considered having regard to the result of the main application. In so far as its object is to attack the constitutionality of Sections 99-A and 99-B of the Criminal Procedure Code, it must fail. I propose to dismiss it. But having regard to what I propose to do in the result of the Criminal Miscellaneous petition, I would make no order as to costs. Srinivasachari, J. 80. I have had the advantage of perusing the judgments of my Lord the Chief Justice and Bhimasankaram, J., and on a consideration of all the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom these observations that we cannot in a light-hearted way brush aside the religious susceptibilities of a class of persons. Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code was introduced after an abortive prosecution of a person who had published a pamphlet called Rangeela Rasool meaning 'amorous Prophet' in which he described the incontinence of the Prophet Mohommed. When he was charged under Section 153-A Indian Penal Code the Lahore High Court held that the man could not be convicted as the attack was only on the founder of the religion and did not amount to creating class hostilities or hatred between classes within the meaning of Section 153-A. If the inevitable consequence of such writing is the excitement of feelings of hatred between the followers of two religions, then it must be put an end to. The matter must be judged primarily by the language of the book itself though it is permissible to receive and consider external evidence either to prove or to rebut the meaning ascribed to it in the order of forfeiture: Kali Charan Sharma v. Emperor, AIR 1927 All 649. 83. No doubt where there is religious freedom, a certain latitude must of necessity be conceded in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
