THE STATE OF BIHAR versus SHAILABALA DEVI

THE STATE OF BIHAR versus SHAILABALA DEVI

Section 4(1)(a) of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, imposes valid restrictions on freedom of speech under Article 19(2) as it specifically targets incitement to violent crimes prejudicial to the security of the State, rather than general public order concerns. The pamphlet in question does not, on its face and without proper evidentiary background provided by the Government, sufficiently establish incitement under section 4(1)(a), and therefore, the security order against the respondent cannot be sustained.

Parties
Appellant: The State of Bihar; Respondent: Shailabala Devi
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 May 1952
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Arts. 132(1) and 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Speech and Expression, Reasonable Restrictions, Validity of Section 4(1)(a) of Indian Press (emergency Powers) Act, Article 19(2), Constitution of India
Constitutional Law Press Law Freedom of Speech and Expression Reasonable Restrictions Validity of Section 4(1)(a) of Indian Press (emergency Powers) Act Article 19(2), Constitution of India

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State of Bihar

Appellant

Shailabala Devi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Arts. 132(1) and 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 4(1)(a) of Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, is unconstitutional by imposing restrictions on freedom of speech and expression beyond the scope of Article 19(2)
  2. 2 Whether the pamphlet in question contains incitement falling within the mischief of section 4(1)(a)

Ratio Decidendi

Section 4(1)(a) of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, imposes valid restrictions on freedom of speech under Article 19(2) as it specifically targets incitement to violent crimes prejudicial to the security of the State, rather than general public order concerns. The pamphlet in question does not, on its face and without proper evidentiary background provided by the Government, sufficiently establish incitement under section 4(1)(a), and therefore, the security order against the respondent cannot be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Security order against respondent under section 4(1)(a) of Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act set aside; respondent's application allowed; parties to bear their own costs.