'Constitution Forecloses Public Authority From Assuming A Guardianship of Public Mind Through Regulating Press' : Tripura HC [Read Judgment]

The Tripura High Court on Friday pulled up the District Magistrate, West Tripura, for his highhandedness in the controversy relating to cancellation of registration of Daily Desher Katha newspaper. In its judgment running over a hundred pages, the bench of Justice S. Talapatra observed that the District Magistrate, based on whose recommendation the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) cancelled the certificate of registration of the newspaper, had "overstepped" his jurisdiction of inquiry. Accordingly, the Court has asked the concerned authorities to restore the certificate of registration issued in favour of Daily Desher Katha."The Indian Constitution also forecloses public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind through regulating the press", the Court observed in the order. The order has come in a writ petition filed by the local daily, challenging the cancellation of registration certificate issued to it subsequent to intimation regarding change in ownership.The Court observed that the authority overstepped the authority conferred by law and infringed the fundamental right to freedom of speech."The propensity of overstepping the authority is dangerous for the rule of law or the constitutional democracy. Even a smaller contravention cannot be liberally dealt with. The impugned action of the District Magistrate is an example how an authority wields power and jurisdiction beyond the power which has been delegated to him by the statute", the Court observed." The Indian Constitution also forecloses public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind through regulating the press".The propensity of overstepping the authority is dangerous for the rule of law or the constitutional democracy. Even a smaller contravention cannot be liberally dealt with. The impugned action of the District Magistrate is an example how an authority wields power and jurisdiction beyond the power which has been delegated to him by the statute." "...to protect the freedom of press from any machination, wholly unacknowledged by the statute or by delegation of power, is of utmost importance in order to protect the constitutional democracy. Thus, the way the District Magistrate has conducted the proceeding or finally passed the impugned order dated 01.10.2018 is grossly illegal and hence it has been interfered with", the Court said.Background The daily, previously owned by the CPI(M) Tripura state committee, changed its ownership declaration as a newspaper published from Daily Desher Katha Society. Accordingly, a fresh declaration intimating about change in ownership was submitted before the concerned authorities in the year 2012, in terms of Section 5(2E) of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. The newspaper had also filed a declaration regarding change in name of the editor as Samir Paul, in place of Gautam Das, in March 2015. The declaration was suddenly cancelled vide an order dated October 1, 2018, apparently based on a complaint filed by one Shyamal Debnath to the DM, West Tripura seeking stoppage of the publication of the said newspaper, alleging mismatch between the information of editor, printer and publisher provided in the newspapers' declaration and data maintained with the RNI. Findings The Court observed that the Press Registrar had failed to effect the changes, so intimated by the newspaper in its ownership, in the Office records, "for unexplained reason". It noted that the declaration dated 18.07.2012 as submitted to the office of the District Magistrate was not given effect to and it is only in the reply filed before the Court, it has been stated that "such changes were not effected on the ground that no document of change of ownership from the CPI (M) State Committee was submitted". The DM submitted that the then publisher, Gautam Das who made the declaration and claimed to be publisher under the new owner namely Daily Desher Katha Trust did not only fail to produce any authenticity of the formation of the society and that of transfer of ownership from CPI(M) party but also failed to produce any authority in writing authorizing him to make such declaration as required under Section 5(2D) of the PRB Act. Unconvinced by this submission, the bench clarified that "declaration and the declaration alone is sufficient to suffice the purpose of Section 3 of the PRB Act." It held that the statute does not require submission of any supportive document from the person filing a declaration of ownership. The Court observed that a declaration— "cannot be questioned by the District Magistrate without any dispute raised by any person claiming ownership or without asking for the further evidence in this regard, if in any case the District Magistrate is not satisfied during the authentication of the declaration. … It is the printer or publisher or printer and publisher who shall make such declaration taking the ...

'Constitution Forecloses Public Authority From Assuming A Guardianship of Public Mind Through Regulating Press' : Tripura HC [Read Judgment]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

The HC set aside the cancellation of registration of 'Daily Deshar Katha' daily.

Tags