Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1995(0)MPLJ944
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The petitioner aged 25 years is a student of M.B.B.S. He is residing at Chetakpuri, Gwalior. He has filed this public interest litigation and is aggrieved against the manner in which obscene display of female figure is being made by newspapers, magazines and other video medias. According to him these publications are offensive to decency, modesty and are lewd and repulsive. All publications to which reference has been made in the petition are being published from places which do not fall within the State of Madhya Pradesh. However, this is not the ground for rejecting this public interest litigation because these publications appear to be available in this State as some of these form part of the record of this petition.2. So far as the locus standi of the petitioner to move this Court by way of public interest litigation is concerned, there is no doubt about it. Such a right was recognised in the case of R. v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis. Ex parte Bl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IAD(Delhi)1; 1994(1)ARBLR156(Delhi); 53(1994)DLT166; 1994(28)DRJ286
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) The plaintiff claims to be the exclusive licensee from the Central Board of Secondary Education for the purposes of publication of papers of 10th and 12th class. (2) It is claimed by the plaintiff that there is a license in his favor, given by the Central Board of Secondary Education to publish the said papers. (3) By this suit, the plaintiff seeks to restrain the defendants No. 1 and 2 from publishing the very same papers, asserting that they do not have a similar license that the plaintiff has, and being a licensee, he is entitled to restrain the said defendants form publishing the said papers. (4) The question papers for examination are nothing but a collection of questions which are required to be answered by each examinee. They are akin to 'table'. questions having been tabulated. As each question is stringing together of words of the language in which the questions appear, creating 'expression', which formulates concepts that next exposition, which need to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2003AP121; 2003(1)ALD256
ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in preventing the sale of the publications of the petitioner, namely, Ned Prapancham and Yuva Sanchalanam in the depots belonging to respondents 1 and 2 and for a consequential direction to permit the petitioner to sell the said magazines in the premises of the RTC Complex in the State.2. The brief facts of the writ petition are as follows:3. The petitioner is the Editor and Publisher of Neti Prapancham and Yuva Sanchalanam monthly Telugu Magazines. The magazine of Neti Prapancham was registered under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 with Registration No. 65598 of 1993. It is submitted that the said magazine came into existence in the year 1993 and is being published uninterruptedly. It is submitted that the said magazine reports contemporary issues and apart from reporting political scenario of the State and also publishes real stories of all walks of life includi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1986)52CTR(Mad)354; [1986]159ITR381(Mad)
1. Freedom of speech and a free press are indispensable prerequisites of a democratic and free society. In fact, democracy without a free press is a contradiction in terms. It is through a free and responsible press that public opinion is moulded and grievances of individuals and groups ventilated. The commanding position of owners managers, editors and publishers of newspapers in a democratic set up has evils of its own.2. The doctrine of rule of law rests on the basic foundation and structure of a country's well-ordered government and its established courts of justice. Though it is the legislative wing of the Government that makes the law, there is yet a large body of common law based on customs and practices of the society which gives them the sanctity of law. In the ultimate analysis, it is the courts of justice that administer all these law and in their interpretative jurisdiction, they take note of the intendment of the legislature and often supply the omissions in the enacted la...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1994KAR2068; 1995(1)KarLJ219
R. Ramakrishna, J.1. This Appeal is confined to the order on I.A.No. I, dated 2-3-1984 passed by the 17th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in O.S.No. 7087 of 1983. The learned Civil Judge passed a common order on I.A.Nos. I and II. I.A.No. I is filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The first respondent prayed for grant of a temporary injunction ^straining the appellant and the second respondent from printing, publishing or in any manner using in relation to any news papers, publications, magazines, periodicals or stationery bearing the impugned trade mark 'Financial Times' or any other deceptively similar trade mark so as to infringe the plaintiff's registered trade mark No. 468937. By I.A.No. II the relief claimed was an order of temporary injunction under 'he same provisions of law to restrain the appellant to pass off or enable others to pass off the first respondent's publication arid for the benefit of the first respondent a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1960All450; 1960CriLJ1037
ORDERM.C. Desai, J.1. The applicant, who has been convicted under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, is the manager, printer and proprietor of Asrar Karimi Press in Allahabad. Aman Ullah applicant in the companion case has been convicted through the same judgment under Section 7 of the Copyright Act and Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act.2. In 1944-45 a firm in Allahabad, known as Rai Saheb Ram Dayal Agarwala, carrying on the business of publishing, printing and selling books, got a series of books known as Abr-e-Rahmat compiled by one Khan Saheb Chhotey Khan and got them approved by the Islamia Maktab Committee of Uttar Pradesh for use in Islamia Maktabs in the State. The series consists of a primer called Abr-e-Rahmat Primer and three volumes called Abr-e-Rahmat I, Abr-e-Rahmat II and Abr-e-Rahmat III. Chhotey Khan transferred his copyright in the series to the firm which now holds absolute copyright in it. The series was printed in Shanti Press...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1958Raj350
ORDERJagat Narayan, J.1. This is a revision application by one Kishan Narayan, owner of a printing press in Jodhpur, against his conviction under Section 12 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, for a breach of Section 3 of the Act.2. The only question for determination in this case is whether a leaflet, which has been held by both the courts below to have been printed in the press of the applicant, is a book within the meaning of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, as it stood in 1952.Questions of fact cannot be gone into in revision in the face of concurrent finding of facts by the two courts below. Section 3 lays down that every book or paper printed within India shall have printed legibly on it the name of the printer and the place of printing. The contention of the applicant before the court below was that the leaflet in question does not fall within the definition of 'book' contained in the Act.'Book' is defined as including every volume, part or division o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC154; (1979)2SCC8; [1979]1SCR664
Fazal Ali, J.1. This election appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Kerala dated 19th December, 1977 by which the election of the appellant Haji C.H. Mohammad Koya has been set aside and he has been disqualified from taking part in the elections for a period of six years under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act).2. For the purpose of brevity we shall refer to the respondent-petitioner as the Petitioner and Haji C.H. Mohammad Koya as the appellant.3. In the general election held to the Legislative Assembly of Kerala on 20th March, 1977 the petitioner and the appellant were the contesting candidates from No. 34 Malappuram Constituency. The counting of votes took place on the 20th March, 1977 and the appellant was declared elected on the same date. The total votes polled were 56.276. The appellant secured 39,362 votes and thus defeated the petitioner by a margin of 20,000 votes. Aggrieved by the election results, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR2005Bom291; 2004(4)ALLMR578; 2004(6)BomCR579; 2004(4)MhLj465
1. Petitioners and their advocate are absent.2. Heard Mr. Mandalik appearing for the respondent No. 1 to 3.3. The 1st petitioner is a publisher of a periodical called 'Kalnirnaya' published annually and 2nd petitioner is a sole selling agent of said publication. The 'Kalnirnaya' is published in English, Marathi and several other regional languages. The respondent No. 1 Kalyan Municipal Corporation, is a statutory authority constituted under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 and respondent No. 2 and 3 are the Officers of the Corporation. By this petition, the petitioners are seeking to challenge the order dated 12th April 1994 passed by the respondent No. 3 declining to grant exemption from octroi duty to the petitioners' publication 'Kalnirnaya' under Schedule II part I of Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules 1968.4. It appears that Kalyan Municipal Corporation has not framed any octroi rules and the levy of octroi on the goods and articles is made from 1st Apr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(4)BomCR156
H. Suresh, J.1. The petitioner Sharad Rao, a Member of the party of Janata Dal contested election to 42, Goregaon Legislative Assembly Constituency, held on February 27, 1990. Respondent No. 1, Subhash Desai, a Shiv-Sena Member, contested in the same constituency against the petitioner. Respondent No. 1 was declared as elected. There were other candidates from other parties who have all been made parties to the petition. The petitioner has filed this petition to set aside the election of respondent No. 1 on the ground of certain corrupt practices as provided under the representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1951). The charges are under section 123(1), bribery, by way of gift of various articles to the voters 123(3), appeal by respondent No. 1 or his agent or any other person with his consent to vote or refrain from voting on the ground of religion or community 123(3-A), promotion of or attempt to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different...
Tag this Judgment!