Madhusudan Mahanti vs Emperor

Chatterji, J.—This is a reference u/s 438, Criminal P.C., by the learned Sessions Judge of Cuttack recommending that the conviction and sentence passed on the accused Madhusudan Mahanti by a 1st class Magistrate, Cuttack, in two cases u/s 16, Press and Registration of Books Act (Act 25 of 1867), may be set aside. The cases were started on the com-plaint of the Sub-Deputy Magistrate in charge, Book registration, Cuttack, to the effect that the accused did not deliver to his office, as required under the provisions of Section 9 of Act 25 of 1867, copies of two pamphlets printed in Oriya, namely, (1) "Appeal to Guardians" dated 6th April 1939 and(2) "Nikhil Utkal Chhatra Sangha-Bul letin No. 1" dated 3rd April 1939.

The accused is admittedly the printer of a press known as the "Observer Press" at Cuttack. The trying Magistrate found that the two documents in question which in his opinion are pamphlets and as such fall within the definition of "book" as given in Act 25 of 1867 were printed in the said press of the accused and he did not deliver copies of the same to the office of the complainant as required by the provisions of Section 9 of the

Act. Accordingly in both the cases he convicted the accused u/s 16 of the Act and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 25 in each case and in default to suffer one month''s simple imprisonment. The accused filed applications in revision before the Sessions Judge of Cuttack who has made the reference to this Court. The learned Sessions Judge is of opinion that "either of the two documents in respect of which the accused has been convicted is a book as defined in Act 25 of 1867. In Section 1 of the Act a book is defined 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.

The question therefore is whether the documents in question come within this definition. In one case "Nikhil Utkal Chhatra Sangha--Bulletin No. 1" Ex. 2 consists of one sheet of paper with two printed pages. In the other case "Appeal to Guardians" Ex. 1 consists of one folded sheet of paper with four pages. The learned Sessions Judge is of opinion that

a pamphlet must consist of more than one sheet and therefore the document which only contains one sheet cannot be a pamphlet.

According to Oxford Dictionary "pamphlet" means:

(1) A small treatise occupying fewer pages or sheets than would make a book, composed and written, or printed, and issued as a separate work, always unbound, with or without paper covers;

(2) More specifically, a treatise of the size and form above described on some subject or question of current or temporary interest, personal, social, political, ecclesiastical, or controversial, on which the writer desires to appeal to the public.

In Concise Oxford Dictionary the meaning of "pamphlet" given is "Small unbound treatise, esp. on subject of current interest." According to the New Waverley English Dictionary "pamphlet" means:

A small book of a few sheets stitched, hut not bound, usually on some subject of temporary interest.

It thus appears that according to the dictionary meaning a document consisting of only one sheet cannot be called a pamphlet. I do not think the Act contemplates that a single sheet of paper in which a writer publishes an article relating to some current topic should be regarded as a book of which a copy is required to be delivered to the officer concerned under the Act. In my opinion neither of the two documents Ex. 1 and Ex. 2 is a book as defined in the Act. The convictions, therefore, cannot stand. Mr. G.P. Das in opposing the reference contends that the definition of "book" as given in Section 1 of Act 25 of 1867 is not exhaustive. He lays stress on the word ''includes.'' In other words, his contention is that "book" may include documents other than those specifically mentioned in the definition. To accept this argument would make the definition useless.

I should like to observe that the penalty prescribed by Section 16 of Act 25 of 1867 is that the printer

shall for every such default forfeit to the Government such sum not exceeding fifty rupees as a Magistrate having jurisdiction in the place where the book was printed may....determine to be in the circumstances a reasonable penalty for the default and in addition to such sum, such further sum as the Magistrate may determine to be the value of the copies which the printer ought to have delivered.

The Section therefore does not provide for conviction and sentence. This may be ''contrasted with Sections 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16(a) all of which prescribe that the offender "shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be punished by fine...."I accept the reference and set aside the convictions and sentences passed on the accused. The fines, if paid, will be refunded to him.