P L D 1955 Lahore 248 (PLP)

KAYANI, J.‑Mr. Muhammad Saleem, publisher of the "Hilal‑e‑Pakistan", a daily paper of Lahore, has applied under section 23 of the Press (Emergency Powers) Act for the setting aside of an order of the Provincial Government calling upon him to furnish a security of Rs. 1,000 under section 7 subsection (3) of the Act for publishing articles which contain "words of the nature described in clause (d) subsection (1) of section 4" of the Act. Clause (d) makes the penal provis ions of the section applicable if the words published tend directly or indirectly to bring into hatred or contempt the Government established by law or to excite disaffection towards Government. The section requires that the notice sent by the Provincial Government to the keeper of the press shall state or describe the words, and Para 4 of the petition complains that the offending words have not been specified. As, however, this matter was not raised in argument and the original articles have been read out to us by the counsel for, the petitioner, we need say no more than point out that the authority who acts on behalf of the Government should devote some attention to the provisions of the section before' issuing notice. The articles in question are the following : ‑

1. Alijah.

2. Punjab ke sarkari godamon men no haror rupai ki gandum sar gai.

3. No karor ki woh gandum.

4. Sazishon ka mulk.

5. Chaupat raja.

6. Amriki gandum.

7. Imdadi fund. Two of these articles, Nos. 2 and 3, are relatable to a complaint in respect of wheat which was alleged to have rotted in the god owns of Government and was being dumped on people. It appeared, in the first instance, as a news item that with a view to making room for fresh wheat the Government was emptying the god owns of wheat worth nine crore which had rotted and that people would be compel led to consume it. Next, there was an editorial criticising the decision of Government and pointing out that it was perhaps for this reason that wheat flour was sold in Karachi at a rate two rupees cheaper per maund than wheat itself. Three days later, however, the editor published as a news item a statement of the Food Secretary that the information in respect of the wheat being rotten was incorrect. There was no comment one way or the other on the statement of the Food Secretary. Ten days later an editorial relating to American wheat was published. This is the subject‑matter of the sixth article and had nothing to do with the rotten wheat of Lahore but criticised the decision of Government to make itself beholden to America and yet to dispose of the wheat by sale and not as a free gift. We find nothing objectionable in these three articles. In fact even the "Pakistan Times" in its issue of the 7th May‑ 1954, published a news item relating to moth‑eaten and damaged wheat. Notwithstanding the announcement of the Food Department we have not been having good wheat throughout summer, and if a paper protests that damaged wheat should not be forced on the people. it is not saying a great deal. The Article at No. 4. "sazishon ka mulk", (a land of intrigues) constitutes an editorial published on the 18th of May 1954. It points to the frequent race for supremacy between the Provinces and the Centre, the frequent votes of no‑confidence against various Governments and the resultant absence of security which disables the Government from planning out anything useful for the people with untroubled mind. It is reminiscent of the dream which became real or the creation of Pakistan with the united will of a people who followed the same God, the same prophet, the same Qur'an and a single leader, notwithstanding "satanic" opposition, and warns us that if we did not pull ourselves together we might lose that freedom for which lacs of people had lost their lives. Then follows the following passage :‑ "The present state of affairs has not come about in a single day but has resulted from seven years' culpable negligence and has brought us to this state of humiliation and disgrace. Evil has taken root in every corner of the country. Discrimination based on colour, race and com munity is reappearing. Unrest is increasing. But our leaders, intoxicated with power, are even today absorbed in pleasant chatter. The entire nation is unanimous in the demand that the Provincial and Central Governments should be purged of unpopular and dishonest persons so that stable ministries may be formed and the interests of the people safeguarded. If a further step is not taken in this behalf, it is feared that the riots of East Bengal will disintegrate the nation." We are not quite sure that the mind of a patriotic person injured with the sight of political intrigues could be better expressed than in this editorial. One might say that it is prophetic of the latest changes throughout the country. The article entitled as "chaupat raja" was published as an editorial on the 20th of May 1954. In the first paragraph it refers to the loss of three hundred lives as a result of riots in East Bengal, holding the Government responsible for its failure to maintain law and order. In the second paragraph it brings to book the United Front leaders for resurrecting the Bengali and non‑Bengali question. It states that although the principal responsibility lies with Mr. Fazl‑ul‑Haq, Mr. Muhammad Ali also could not be exonerated. In the third paragraph emphasis is laid on the fact that these internecine bickerings had lowered our credit in the international field and had raised the hopes of our neighbours across the border. The fourth paragraph to which exception is taken is more or less in these terms :‑ "Our affairs have deteriorated regrettably. The Pakistanis are now engaged in mutual quarrels. From this confusion one cannot but get a feeling that the Government's preven tive laws and the police rule established by it are intended (to Punish) only the good and the weak and that the mischievous can raise a storm where they please, untrammel led. For the past seven years bribary, nepotism, unemploy ment, factiousness, provincialism and other evils have been taking root, but the leadership have shut their eyes to them. Today the friendless nation is plunged in the depth of disgrace. A dreadful state of lawlessness prevails. Hungry lions are roaring for minister ships in the beautiful buildings of the Legislative assemblies and in the likeness of the "chaupat raja" disorder and restlessness are spreading with satanic speed." Our attention has been drawn by the learned Assistant Advocate‑General to two passages in this editorial. The first occurs in paragraph one, where the machinery of law and order has been stated to have "badly failed" in connection with the East Bengal riots : fox which reason it has been suggested that, having failed in a fundamental duty, the Government should vacate office in the national interest. Law and order provincial subject, the recommendation was perhaps made to the United Front Ministry, and in view of what has happened subsequently, the publisher might well say his suggestion has been accepted. In connection with those riots, the words "communist plot" and." engineered" have been so frequently and so openly used that their use in an editorial could have added little to public feeling or knowledge, and 'in any case, whatever was said by anybody was said in a patriotic strain, without any thought of inciting disaffection. The second passage occurs at the end. It is not to the description of the roaring lions hungering for ministerial manna that exception has been taken on behalf of Government, perhaps because that is a personal remark and may have been intended, not for the existing Government, but for those aspiring to be included in it. The matter under exception is in two parts. In the first part the editor feels that the preventive measures of Government have not succeeded in punishing the mischievous. If the reference is to the East Bengal riots‑and in this context no other inference is reason able‑I do not see why it should be taken so seriously to heart. The only objection that can be taken to it is that the reasoning is not sound, for the riots did not occur because the law did not intend to punish the mischievous. In the second part the leadership is accused of shutting its eyes to bribery, nepotism and kindred diseases of the body politic. Firstly, it must be clear that the Government itself is not charged with these offences. On that basis, I think it is the right of every honest citizen to point out to the Government that an evil is eating us away, and I think any person at the steering wheel, with the good of his passengers at heart‑and, incidentally, his own good too‑should welcome timely information from a passing vehicle that his rear wheel is wobbling. It may be that the steersman will be offended if he is fold bluntly that he will come to grief if he is not atten tive to the wobble, but whether the remark will tend to bring him into hatred or contempt or incite disaffection against him is a very different matter. We, therefore, do not regard this article actionable. There are now left two articles, "Alijah" and "Imdadi Fund", and our first impressions of these, when they were read out to us, were not favourable. I have vacillated in respect of the former, but my first impression of the latter has abided. I should mention here that all the seven articles, when read in the English translation, (which is substantially correct) sounded more objectionable than they did in Urdu, perhaps because the Urdu language has the misfortune of lending itself more amicably to exaggeration, and people have become so familiar with terms of "satanic" description that milder expressions do not convey to them ample meaning. This we should bear in mind. "Alijah" is an editorial provoked apparently by the Prime Ministers monthly broadcast, and the burden of the complaint is that since the birth of Pakistan the editor's ears have yearned for truth. "Day in and day out our masters weave fresh lies to delude the patriotic Pakistanis . . .. . . . Fundamental problems of food, clothing and housing are confounding the country, but our Government has taken no solid step towards their solution . . . . To keep body and soul together; to get two meals a day, people are constrained to sell their most cherished treasure‑their honour and chastity. Our Jahangirs take refuge in lofty palaces while the real refugees are still seeking asylum in the vastness of heaven and earth. In this setting our beloved Prime Minister broadcasts a flowery speech on the first of each month and paints in gold the colourless deeds of his colleagues. . , Is it not possible that these lease holders of our lives should now say good‑bye to ostentation and attend to the betterment of the people ?" "After the political upheaval of 1947 . . . . . falsehood has come to reign. The hearing or telling of truth has come to be an offence . . . Today people are helpless for want of food and clothing. No ‑one inquires after them. Peace, comfort and happiness have become confined to a few lofty castles. Poverty is paralysing life in the country . . . . . . . . Our ministers and nobles are even today stretching themselves in confortable beds with Mughal pomp. How dare we criticise our rulers? . . . . We all know that the gods above, when creating Pakistan, created also minis terial chairs and the ministers to sit in them. How can we raise a voice against the will of God? Our masters should not suspect our loyailty. Hungry or naked, people will in any case remain loyal. It is unnecessary to lie in order to keep them under control . . . . Come storm or flood, ministerial chairs are safe . . . . . ." And in this plaintive strain the editor goes on, perplexed, not so much by the lies compounded in the political dispensary as by the immutability of ministerial chairs. That perplexity, we know, was not well‑founded in May 1954, and is not well founded even today, and we fear that the editor has not kept himself abreast of the phenomenal changes in the ministerial set‑up all over the country during the last seven years. But it is not the complaint of the learned counsel for the Government that the editor has tried to create a false impres sion about the permanency of ministerial chairs; the complaint is that he has tried to hold up the chairs to ridicule, to create contempt and hatred for them. And howsoever reluctant we may be to punish an honest though immoderate 'effort at reform, we must be sure that a proper line is drawn somewhere between fair criticism and a craving for fame. The press should express itself with such dignity and exaltedness as to press us down with the weight of its opinion, to carry us away with the sanity of its outlook. But the impression one gets here is somewhat that of Nero tuning away food, clothing and politics while Pakistan is burning‑perhaps not so bad as Nero, because Nero did not bother to weave out monthly falsehoods. To tell a Government that people are without food, clothing and houses is one thing; to say that while you stretch your hairy legs in beds of velvet and reside in Jehangir's palace, people sell their chastity and honour for two meals a day, is another thing. Not only do you stretch your hairy legs‑I have introduced the word "hairy" because that is the only word the editor has missed here‑in beds of comfort: you must inflict lies on us in calendared instalments, unmitiga ted lies, such as the ear of man hath never heard, not even of men who have heard nothing but lies, of man who live in a modern democracy. And why is it necessary1for you, Moghuls Neroes and Ministers, to tell lies when your chairs are secure These chairs were created for you with, the, birth of Pakistan and you cannot be unseated. Unless people resign themselves to the will of God and the Muslim League, these observations cannot but create in B them a feeling of definite hatred and contempt towards the Government. The last article, "Imdadi Fund", is worse still. It is again an editorial, and refers to the Governor‑General's announce ment opening a relief fund for the benefit of the heirs of those who lost their lives in the Narayangunj riots. This, says the editor, was a laudable effort, but relief funds in Pakistan had a very regrettable history. There was a Qaid‑i‑Azam fund for the relief of refugees, but "most of it failed to clear the lofty walls of the Government's palace of authority and react: the poor people affected by the Partition . . . . . All than money was undoubtedly spent, but nobody knows where To suspect the Qaid‑i‑Azam's sincerity and faith amounts to blasphemy, but what could a single man of faith do among a gang of pickpockets? . . . . And then the glass palace of Government has become the rendezvous of all the evils of the world. Bribery and nepotism have paralysed our official life In these circumstances, whatever work of public welfare is entrusted to the present administrative set‑up, benefits less the wailing and sobbing humanity and more our officers of good repute : . . . There was a Qaid‑i‑Azam Memorial fund also,‑Where is it now? People must wait a few more years before they become acquainted with this secret. "During this period‑leaving the aforesaid funds apart the Government has several times laid hands on the money drawn from the public in the name of emergent catastrophes But it is a bitter' truth that, like the monkey in the parable, Government so distributed this money that new palaces were built for the higher authorities while the refugees continued seeking refuge. Relief funds in Pakistan have a very regret table background. The Governor‑General have now opened a new fund for the benefit of sufferers in the East Bengal riots. No sane person will oppose it, but the contributors have a right of demanding that it should be expended beneficially . . . . . If people respond to every call of Government for money, they do not do sc merely to fatten the Government rats . . . . . . It requires no effort to see that the Government and its officers have been shamelessly accused of embezzling relief moneys. These moneys, according to the editor, have been kept behind lofty walls and spent nobody knows how. This is not bad enough, for the editor ma) not know that Government has devoted them to a good purpose, and the editor, like any other member of the public, has a right of knowing how it was spent. But it is not his anxiety to know that prompts him to write this editorial : he knows it already. Those pickpockets who surrounded the Qaid‑i‑Azam also knew it. . . . They live in glass‑palaces, the rendezvous of all evils in the world, not of bribery and nepotism alone. And now they will have another cake, quite a wedding‑cake, and some major monkey, representing all the minor monkeys, will sit in arbitration between cats and eat away parcels of the cake, sometimes from one scale, sometimes from the other, until only the scales are left. This is a pretty bad article, the only redeeming feature being that if the editor's estimate is correct, there is since the days of the. Qaid‑i‑Azam, some improvement in the Government or its officers. In the days of the Qaid they were pickpockets; now they are mere rats pampered with cake. What the editor has said could be said, as effectively without resort to the simile of pickpockets and rats. And he could have said it with more dignity. "There are whisperings", he could say, "that relief moneys have not been devoted to the causes for which they were collected. In fact the whisperings go quite to an immoderate length, and we hope they are the evil whisprings of the slinking devil. But this has a bad effect on the faith of the people in Government and it is, therefore, necessary tell them how the moneys were spent." This form would be adopted by a person who thought the Government was his own and that it was his duty not to create hatred, contempt or disaffection for it. We heard somebody say that democracy never had a chance in Pakistan and some one retort that it has run riot during the past seven years. We hesitate to say that both are right, but I can say for myself that democracy has certainly a tendency of running riot in a part of the press if some wholesome advice is not administered to it. It can serve larger purposes if it can exalt itself beyond the rats and pickpockets. There are rats and pickpockets everywhere and quite some fat ones in these extraordinary times, but I am sure the ingenuity of the press will be able to devise a rat poison which can be administered to pickpockets also. I, therefore, uphold the action of Government in requiring the publisher to deposit a security of Rs. 1,

000. This is a milder action than forfeiture. The petition is dismissed, A. H. Petition dismissed.