9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (9) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne of which has been marked as Ex. P-1, without the names of the printer and of the publisher and the place of printing and of publication being printed on them. The leaflets were printed at the Pearl Press, Secunderabad. The evidence of P. W. 1, the proprietor of the press is that on or about 27-12-1957, the 1st respondent gave him the order to print them and that on 31-12-1957, the 1st respondent took delivery of 500 out of 1000 copies that were printed. The matter printed in the leaflets may be shortly described as an appeal to police men to support the Andhra Pradesh. Police Employees' Association. Below this matter, the names and other particulars of the respondents are found printed thus: The respondents are Amrutrao, Jacob and V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall have printed legibly on it the name of the printer and the place of printing and if the book or paper be published the name of the publisher and the place of publication. 12. Whoever shall print or publish any book or paper otherwise than in conformity with the rule contained in Section 3 of this Act shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be punished by fine not exceeding ₹ 2000/- or by simple imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or by both." 4. Sri V. V. Siva Rao, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, contends that Ex. P-1, which id a single sheet with four pages in octavo size, is neither a pamphlet coming within the definition of 'book' in Section 1 of the Act, nor a 'paper' coming w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rue that as pointed out by Beaumont, C. J., in AIR 1937 Bom 28, every printed invitation to a dinner or to a party of any sort and even every printed visiting card would now be a 'paper' which if printed in this country has to conform to Section 3 of the Act. The resulting general inconvenience is a matter calling for remedial action under Section 21. which empowers the State Government to exclude any class of books and papers from the operation of the Act. 5. The question whether the names of the respondents printed at the end of Ex. P-1, taken along with the heading at the beginning "Andhra Pradesh Police Employees' Association" which is followed by the address of the Association at Guntur, would comply with the req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g information regarding the responsible printer.' The same view was taken by the Punjab Chief Court in Emperor v. Bhawani Das, 2 Ind Cas 978, where Reid, Chief Judge interpreting the rule in Section 3 said: "The object of the rule obviously is that the paper should clearly intimate who is liable as printer and who is liable as publisher." The paper must ex facie communicate the information to the public as to who is responsible as the printer and the publisher. Ex. P-1 merely discloses the names of the four persons that issued the appeal to the police men on behalf of the Association and their "camp" from which they issued the appeal. They may be the publishers or merely the authors of the appeal. It follows that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lone is responsible for seeing that the name of the printer and place of printing are shown in a book or paper and that the publisher is responsible only for showing the name of the publisher and the place of publication therein. He relied on the position in the section of the clause "and if the book or paper is published." But I am unable to see how it assists the learned counsel's construction. On the other hand, it may in certain circumstances avail the printer, but not the publisher. If the printer is under a mistaken impression that the book or paper would not be published and therefore prints only his own name and the place of printing, the defence would be open to him that on account of his mistake of fact, he did not p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the time of the introduction of a measure are concerned, they do not control the meaning of the words in a statute. In Krishna Ayyangar v. Nallanerumal Pillai ILR 49 Mad 550 at p. 565 MANU/PR/0023/1919 : AIR 1920 PC 56 at p. 59 Viscount Finlay observed "No statement made on the introduction of the measure or its discussion can be looked at as affording any guidance as to the meaning of the words". In Aswini Kurnar v. Arahinda Bosc. ATR 1952 SC 369, Mukherjee, J. (as he then was) said: "It is one of the settled rules of construction that to ascertain the legislative intent all the constituent parts of a statute are to be taken together and each word, phrase or sentence is to be considered in the light of the general purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
