P (PLP)

The Press as a rule have no right to make the correctness of decision of a subordinate judicial officer, a public issue by imputing motives to the officer concerned The correct course for the Press where they have reasons to believe that a dishonest judgment has been delivered is to approach the appropriate authority and ask for a regular inquiry against the officer concerned and not to broadcast the imputation because such publications have the inevitable effect of undermining public confidence in the administration of justice, and thus constitute contempt of a very serious character. Shabir Ahmad, Advocate General, for Crown. Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din, for Respondent. JUDGMENT.‑I issued notice in this case to the respondents to show cause against contempt because of the general importance of the question involved, namely; whether the Press are entitled to publish imputations of dishonesty, against the members of the subordinate judiciary of the province. The respondents to the notice are Akhtar Ali Khan, Editor of the Urdu Daily "Zamindar", Taj‑ud‑Din Ansari, the Editor, and Sheikh Hissam‑ud‑Din the Printer and Publisher of the Vernacular daily "Azad", and one Karam Ilahi of Hazro in the Campbellpur District. In its issue of 20th November, 1949, the "Zamindar" published a news item to the effect that there was a general rumour that the Senior Sub-Judge of Campbellpur was not impartial in his decisions in cases to which Qadianis, men of his own religious persuasion, were parties and that judgments in such cases were delivered dishonest by in favour of the Qadianis. This news also appeared in the "Azad" of 23rd November, 1949. In reply to the notices the Editor of "Azad" stated that he had copied article from the Zamindar" while the Editor of the "Zamindar" alleged that the article had been contributed by Kai an, Ilahi respondent. Karam Ilahi, however, denied that he had anything to do with the publication. There can be no doubt that the publication in question amounts to contempt. It has never been doubted that imputation of improper or dishonest motives to subordinate judicial officers in their judicial determinations amounts to contempt of a very serious kind, and the sooner this position is realised by the better. It must be remembered that a party aggrieved by a decision of a subordinate, judicial officer almost invariably has a right to have the wrong set right it appeal or revision and the Press as a rule 'have no right to make the correctness of such decision a public issue by imputing motives to the officer concerned. The correct course for the Press where they have reasons to believe that a dishonest judgment has be; n delivered is to approach the appropriate authority and ask for a regular inquiry against the officer concerned and not to broadcast the imputation in the manner in which they have done in the present case because such publications have the inevitable effect of undermining public confidence in the administration of justice, and thus constitute contempt of a very serious character. It is stated by the Editors of both the papers and the Printer and Publisher of "Azad" that they were not aware of this legal position and that they are extremely sorry for their act. Though ignorance of law is no excuse, I accept their explanation in mitigation of the offence and since they seem to have acted with the best of motives, 1 do not wish to take any action against them. Karam Ilahi denies that he is the author of the publication, and the only evidence against him is the allegation of the Editor of the "Zamindar". There is, however, no evidence to show that the article was actual worded by Karam Ilahi in the form in which it was published. I, therefore, consider the evidence against this respondent insufficient and discharge him. K. M. A. Petition dismissed.