VIRENDRA versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

The restrictions imposed by Section 2(1)(a) of the Punjab Special Powers (Press) Act, 1956 are reasonable within the meaning of Article 19(2) and protected, but Section 3 lacks safeguards (time limit and representation) and thus its restrictions are not reasonable under Article 19(6); therefore, notifications under Section 2 are valid, those under Section 3 are invalid.

Parties: Petitioner: Virendra; Petitioner: K. Narendra; Respondent: The State of Punjab; Respondent: Another
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 06 September 1957
Procedural Posture: Article 32 Petitions / Final Judgment
Outcome: Petition No. 95 of 1957 dismissed; Petition No. 96 of 1957 allowed
Legal Topics: Freedom of Speech, Press Restrictions, Reasonable Restrictions, Punjab Special Powers (press) Act, 1956

Constitutional Law Media Law Freedom of Speech Press Restrictions Reasonable Restrictions Punjab Special Powers (press) Act, 1956

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Virendra

Petitioner

K. Narendra

Petitioner

The State of Punjab

Respondent

Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Article 32 Petitions / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Punjab Special Powers (Press) Act, 1956 violates the fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution
2 Whether restrictions imposed by Sections 2 and 3 of the Act are reasonable and saved by Articles 19(2) and 19(6)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Petition No. 95 of 1957 dismissed; Petition No. 96 of 1957 allowed

Orders

Notifications issued under Section 2(1)(a) of the Act stand; those under Section 3 are quashed.
No order as to costs.