LexKARTAR SINGH & OTHERS versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
19~6 AJ>ril 26 476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1956] KARTAR SINGH & OTHERS "· THE STATE OF PUNJAB. [BHAOWATI and CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR, JJ.] Punjab Security of the Stole Act, 1953 (Punjab Act XII of 1953), s. 9-Members of proce38ion shouting defamatory slogans against Ministers of State Government-Prosecution under •· 9-Whether j11stified. The appellants were members of a. procession taken out to pro- test against the policy of the Punjab Government to nationalise motor transport and raised the slogans "Jaggu mama hai hai (Jaggu, maternal uncle he dead)" and "Khachar Kbota hai hai (mule·cum· donkey be dead)". The words were directed against the Transport Minister and the Chief Minister respe9tively and were defamatory. The appellants were prosecuted and convicted under s. 9 of the Pun· jab Security of the mate Act, 1953. Held that the statements could not be said to undermine the security of the State or friendly relations with foreign States nor did they amount to contempt of Court or defamation prejudicial to the security of the State nor did they tend to overthrow the State and that the prosecution had failed to establish that the act of the ap· pellants undermined public order, decency or mora.lity or was tant- amount to an incitement to an offence prejudicial to the mainten- ance of public order and consequently the prosecution under s. 9 was not justified. Public men may as well think it worth their while to ignore such vulgar criticisms and abuses hurled against them, rather than give importance to the same by prosecuting the person responsible for the same. Seymour v. Bullerworth ([1862] 3 F. & F. 372, 376, 377), R. v. Sir R. Carden ((1879] 5 Q.B.D. 1), Kelly v. Sherlock ([1866] L.R. 1 Q.B. 686, 689; 35 L.J. Q.B. 209) referred to. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1955. Appeal by special leave from the order dated the 9th July, 1954 of the Punjab High Court at Simla in Criminal Revision No. 778 of 1954 arising out of the judgment and order dated the 30th June 1954 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar in Criminal Appeal No. 409 of 1954. ---- , S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 477 Ram Das and Raghu Nath Pandit, for the appel- lants. J indralal and P. G. Gokhale, for the respondent. 1956. April 26. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI J.-This appeal with special leave involves the interpretation of section 9 of the Punjab Security of the State Act, 1953 (Punjab Act XII of 1953), hereinafter called "the Act". The appellants were members of the Amritsar District Motor Union which took out a procession on 23rd March, 1954 to protest against the policy of the Punjab Government to nationalise motor transport. The procession started from Gui Park and was taken on lorries and jeeps. It stopped near Chitra Talkies and then started on foot. When it reached near Prabha.t Studio, the appellants raised slogans "Jaggu mama hai hai (Jaggu, maternal uncle be dead)" and "Khachar Khota hai hai (mule-cum-donkey be dead)". The first slogan was alleged to have been directed against the Hon'ble Shri Jagat Narain, Transport Minister, Punjab State and the second slogan against the Hon'ble Shri Bhim Sen Sachar, Chief Minister, Punjab State. The uttering of these slogans was considered objectionable and the appel- lants were charged in the Court of the Magistra.te, First-Class, Amritsar:-"that you, on or about the 23rd day of Ma.rch 1954 at Amritsar, while being members of a procession, raised slogans "J aggu mama hai hai" "Khachar Khota hai hai" which besides be- ing indecent amounted to defamation and was pre- judicial to the security of the State and the main- tenance of public orde·r and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 9 of the Security of the State .Act". The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. They also led evidence in defence. The learned Magistrate, however, disbelieved the defence n.nd, accepting the prosecution evidence, found that the appellants did raise these slogans. In the opinion 1956 Kartar Singh and others •• The Stale of Punjab 1956 Karlar Singh and others v. The State-of Punjab BhagwatlJ. ' 478 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1956) of the learned Magistrate, the slogans were in fact abuses hurled at the Transport Minister and the Chief Minister of the Punjab Government which besides being indecent amounted to defamation and were pre- judici
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.