Supreme Court of India
MANZAR SAYEED KHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
- Citation
- 2009 INSC 534
- Decided
- 16 April 2009
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Holding
The Supreme Court clarified that the order not to proceed under Sections 153, 153A and 34 of the IPC applies to the author, the publisher and the printer of the book.
Summary
Manzar Sayeed Khan, the publisher of the book "Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India", and Vinod Hansraj Goyal, the printer, filed criminal miscellaneous petitions seeking clarification of a Supreme Court judgment dated 5 April 2007. The 2007 judgment had directed that the State of Maharashtra not proceed against the author, Prof. James W. Laine, for alleged offences under Sections 153, 153A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners argued that the order inadvertently omitted the publisher and printer, leaving them vulnerable to prosecution. The Court held that the omission was a mistake and clarified that the direction not to proceed applies equally to the author, the publisher and the printer. Consequently, the petitions were disposed of, confirming that no criminal action shall be taken against any of the three parties under the cited IPC provisions.
Issues considered
- Whether the Supreme Court's earlier order should be clarified to extend the protection from prosecution to the publisher and printer of the book.
- Whether the State of Maharashtra may continue investigation against the publisher and printer under IPC Sections 153, 153A and 34.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 153, s. 153A, s. 34
Subjects
Indian Penal CodeSection 153Section 153ASection 34publisher liabilityprinter liabilityclarification of judgmentcriminal procedurefreedom of expression
Judgment
[2009] 6 S.C.R. 431
" 4
MANZAR SAYEED KHAN & ANR. A
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
(Crl. Misc. Petition Nos.19340 of 2008, 2150 of 2009)
IN
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 491 of 2007 & 496 of 2007) B
APRIL 16, 2009
[K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ., LOKESHWAR SINGH
PANTA AND D. K. JAIN, JJ.]
c
PENAL CODE, 1860:
ss. 153, 153-A rlw s.34 -- FIR alleging offences against
author, Publisher and Printer of book titled "Shivaji: Hindu
. ~
King in Islamic India" - Order of Supreme Court in effect
directing respondents not to proceed against author only -
Application for clarification - HELD: Order clarified to the
D
effect that respondents would not proceed against· author,
Publisher as also Printer of the book.
Manzar Sayeed Khan & Anr. v. State of Manarashtra & E
Anr. 2007 (4 ) SCR 907=(2007) 5 SCC 1, referred to.
Case Law Reference:
2007 (4) SCR 907 referred to para 1
F
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Crl. Misc.
Petition Nos. 19340 of 2008, 2150 of 2009.
IN
~ Criminal Appeal Nos. 491 of 2007 and 496 of 2007. G
From the Judgment & Order dated 06.05.2004 of the High
Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.
280/2004.
431 H
432 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R.
A WITH
Crl. M.P. No. 2150/2008, 496/2007
Soli J. Sorabjee, Kamini Jaiswal, Shomila Bakshi and
Rani Mishra for the Appellants.
B
Shekar Naphade, Gautam Godara (for Ravindra
Keshavrao Adsure), and Satya Siddiqui (for Sushma Suri) for
the Respondents
The Order of the Court was delivered:
c
ORDER
1. Manzar Sayeed Khan, a constituted Attorney and
Managing Director of the Oxford University Press, India - the
D Publisher of the Book titled "Shivaji : Hindu King in Islamic
India" and Vinod Hansraj Goyal, Proprietor of Rashtriya Printing· ·
Press, Shahdara, Delhi - the Printer of the said Book, have filed
the above-said Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions seeking
clarification/modification of the judgment of this Court dated
E 05.04.2007 reported in (2007) 5 SCC 1, whereby this Court
had disposed of the appeals preferred against the order dated
06.05.2004 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in
Criminal Writ Petition No.280 of 2004 and 370 of 2004. By the
impugned order, the High Court vacated its interim order
recorded on 23.02.2004 with a direction to the Crime Branch
F
of the State of Maharashtra to complete the investigation in Fl R
No.10 of 2004 registered at the Deccan Police Station, Pune,
against the appellants-applicants and Prof. James W. Laine,
the author of the book, under Sections 153, 153A and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code [for short 'IPC']. On hearing the learned
G counsel for the parties at length, this Court in paragraph 21 of
the judgment concluded as under:
"21. In the result, for the above-said reasons, the
respondents shall not proceed against Professor James
H W. Laine, the author of the book, for offences under
,·
MANZAR SAYEED KHAN & ANR. v. STATE OF 433
MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
Sections 153, 153A and 34 of the IPC being the subject A
matter of F.l.R. No. 10 of 2004 registered at the Deccan
Police Station, Pune."
2. In paragraph 12 of the judgment, contentions of Mr. Soli
J. Sorabjee, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of B
Manzar Sayeed Khan - appellant were noted in detail and
considered. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel for Vinod
,, Hansaj Goyal-appellant, adopted the arguments advanced by
Mr. Sorabjee.
3. Having gone through the judgment dated 05.04.2007, C
we are of the opinion that manifestly the tenor and import of
the judgment was to grant same and identical relief to Mr.
Manzar Sayeed Khan, Publisher and Mr. Vinod Hansraj Goyal,
·Printer of the Book, which was granted to Prof. James W .
. Laine, the author of the Book. But, it appears that by D
inadvertence or by mistake,· the names of the Publisher and
Printer of the Book had not been recorded in paragraph 21 of
the judgment. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, we feel it expedient in the interest of justice to the parties
to order necessary clarification/modification in paragraph 21 E
of the judgment, which shall get clarified and read as follow:
"21. In the result, for the above-said reasons, the
.. i
respondents shall not proceed against Professor James
W. Laine, the author of the book, Mr. Manzar Sayeed
F
Khan, Publisher of the Book and Mr. Vinod Hansraj Goyal,
Printer of the Book, respectively for offences under
Sections 153, 153A and 34 of the IPC being the subject-
matter of F.l.R. No. 10 of 2004 registered at the Deccan
Police Station, Pune."
G
4. The Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions filed by the
applicants - appellants shall stand disposed of.
R.P. Crl. Misc. Petitions disposed of.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Indian Penal Code"Sign in to search