Surinder Singh and anr. vs State of Punjab

Ajit Singh Bains, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5th April, 1983, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Ropar, whereby Shamsher Singh and Karnail Singh appellants were convicted for the offence under sections 500 and 501, Indian Penal Code, respectively and each one of them was sentenced to undergo four months'' simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/ or in default of payment of fine, to undergo further two months'' simple imprisonment.

The prosecution case as set up at the trial was that the appellants printed and got published in the issue of Weekly "Sachittar Punjab Patrika" dated January 1925, 1981, the following news item captioned as `Ke Sarkar Partal Karwaigi Ropar De Petrol Pumpan De Malkan Ton Paise Battoran Lai Controller Maap Te Tol Punjab Wallon Kojhi Karwai," In that news item, it was mentioned that their special correspondent had reported that a day prior to the visit of Ropar district by Smt. Indira Gandhi on 29th December, 1980, Shri Amarjit Singh, Controller, Weights and Measures, Punjab, made checking of petrol pumps in Ropar district and cancelled the license of Koshal Service Station and Aljit Service Station, on the basis of short age of measures employed by them; Thereafter, he went to Kiratpur Sahib and closed there three petrol pumps on the same ground. The proprietor of one of those petrol pumps, who is exserviceman, represented there that the measure with the Chief Controller was larger than the standard measure. Thereupon, the Controller lost temper and exchanged hot words with him. When the measure with the Chief Controller was compared with the standard measure with the Inspector, Weights and Measures, it was found that former accommodated 50 milligrams of more petrol than the latter. It was apparent that the said five petrol pumps had been sealed on wrong basis, for the measures employed therein were not actually short and shortage thereof was indicated on account of employment of defective measure for checking. In spite of discovery of the said defect in the measure with the said Controller, Weights and Measures, the petrol pump of Singh Service Station was sealed. According to the special correspondent, the said defective measure was intentionally employed so that by representing artificial shortage of the measures employed in their petrol pumps, illegal gratification could be extorted from their proprietors. After seeing all this, the people were feelings turned and were saying that if the fence engulfs the field, the crop cannot be protected and that if the head of Weights and Measures department, makes checking by employing defective measure, correct measurements cannot be made. In that news item, it was further mentioned whether the Punjab Government would take strict action against this wrong by getting held high level enquiry, revoke the proceedings launched against the petrol pump dealers of sealing their petrol pumps and provide guarantee against such harassment of petrol pump dealers, in future. According to the prosecution, the aforesaid news item is defamatory to P.W. 2 Amarjit Singh. Controller, Weights and Measures, Punjab in respect of his conduct in the discharge of his official duties as a Public servant employed in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab.

At the trial, the appellants denied the prosecution allegations. However Karnail Singh and Shamsher Singh appellants admitted that they were respectively printer/publisher and Editor of the said weekly but they contended that they had no malice against Amarjit Singh (P.W.2) and that they had printed and got published the said news item in the said issue of "Sachittar Punjab Patrika" in good faith and in the public interest. However, they did not produce any evidence in defence.

There is no controversy regarding facts. Admittedly Shamsher Singh and Karnail Singh appellants are, respectively, Editor and Printer/Publisher of the said Weekly "Sachittar Punjab Patrika," S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali and they printed and published the aforesaid news item in the issue dated January 1925, 1981, of the said Weekly. The alleged imputation was made against, P.W. 2 Amarjit Singh, Controller of Weights and Measures, Punjab, through the news item, Ex. P.1/A, as described in the earlier part of the judgment. But, in my considered view, the aforesaid publication will not come within the mischief of section 500 or 501 of the Indian Penal Code. It is in evidence that the appellants did not know Amarjit Singh (P.W.2). Amarjit Singh PW has also admitted that he had not known the appellants earlier and there is nothing on the record to show that the appellants had any malice against Amarjit Singh PW. It is also in evidence that the Prime Minister was to visit Anandpur Sahib, Ropar district one day after the raids were conducted by P.W. 2 Amarjit Singh. The news item only asked the State Government to hold enquiry into the matter as the petrol pump dealers had doubt the bona fides of P.W.2 Amarjit Singh. Moreover, there was difference in the measurement used by Amarjit Singh (P.W.2) and the standard measure with the Weights and Measures Inspector. Whatever the Press Correspondent had reported they published in good faith in the interest of general public. It is also not proved on the record that the Government had held any enquiry in the matter. It was incumbent upon the Government to associate the appellants or the petrol pump dealers in the enquiry, but instead of holding the enquiry or going into the truthfulness or the falsity of the news item in the aforesaid Weekly, the prosecution resorted to prosecute the appellants.

It is true that the petrol dealers are also not above board and they often sell substandard petrol and diesel and their measurements are also short, but at the same time it is the duty of the public servants to check them not for any extraneous consideration but in the discharge of their public duty. There is nothing on the record to show that the checking made by Amarjit Singh PW was in accordance with law, except his bald statement. Much reliance cannot be placed on his statement that the measure employed by him was a standard measure as no corroborative evidence has been produced in this regard. In a democratic setup press is known as the fourth limb of the State in addition to the executive, legislature and the judiciary. Press also plays an important and vital role in highlighting the grievances of the public and no democracy can succeed and function well if there is no freedom of press and also if the press does not report the facts impartially. Freedom of press is the cornerstone of the liberty of the people and any attempt to circumscribe it would be bad and repugnant. In a democratic set up and particularly in the present situation, it is the sacred duty of the press to highlight the antisocial activities of the Government functionaries as well as the other segments of the society who indulge in antisocial acts, like smuggling, black marketing, adulteration of foodstuffs etc.

In the present case, the appellants did not express their opinion but published the news item on the basis of the press correspondent''s report in good faith. Accordingly, I am of the view that no offence is made out under section 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code and the case would fall under the ninth Exception to Section 499, Indian Penal Code.

For the reasons recorded, the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentences recorded by the trial Court are set aside. The appellants are on bail. Their bailbonds shall stand discharged.