High Court scraps Modi govt ban on Jaswant book

“It is difficult to believe that the author of the notification has really read or comprehended what the author of the book has to say,” the bench observed. The ban notification says the contents of the book are highly objectionable and against national interest but “in what manner the contents are objectionable and against national interest is not discernible from the notification,” the bench said.

Reacting to the order,Jaswant Singh said while he was “thrilled” and felt vindicated,he was dismayed that courts had to intervene in the matter. “It is a matter of satisfaction that the court has lifted the ban on the book,” Singh said,adding the court had upheld freedom of speech.

The bench said the notification was silent on how contents of the book could be “misleading the public and are against public tranquility and against the interests of the state” as it mentioned. It pointed out no opinion was expressed by the state in the notification.

“Lack of opinion means lack of thinking; lack of thinking means lack of understanding,” the bench said,noting that “the state is dealing with the fundamental rights of its citizens and, therefore,a great amount of caution,prudence and care is expected.”

Petitioners Manishi Jani and Prakash Shah had called the ban on the book a violation of the fundamental right of the people of Gujarat to read,comprehend and criticise its contents.

Defending the absence of grounds on which the book has been banned in the notification,Additional Advocate General Tushar Mehta argued that the very purpose of banning the book would have been frustrated had the “objectionable” parts of the book been produced in the notification.

Not accepting the defence,the bench said: “Law is settled that when the government is exercising powers under Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code (to ban a publication),it has to form an opinion and those opinion will give rise to the grounds and grounds have to be stated in the notification.”

“The notification issued by the state government… falls short of statutory requirements… and consequently,it cannot stand in the eyes of law.”

The bench also dismissed the government submission that it was free to issue a fresh ban notification if there was any infirmity in the current one. “We find no justification to accede to the prayer since… we are only concerned with the validity and legality of the notification impugned.”