The fundamental rights specified in Part III of the Indian Constitution of 1950 are in contradiction with pre constitutional laws, which is basically the central theme of this case. It tackles a major question posed after the 1950 Indian Constitution was passed, would all pre constitutional laws be nullified as soon as the 1950 Indian Constitution went into force.
keshavan madhava menon v state of Bombay Case Facts
- The petitioner, a secretary at People’s Publishing House India Ltd., was charged with distributing a leaflet in Bombay in September 1949 with the title “Railway Mazdooron ke khilaaf nai Zazish.” The pamphlet was alleged to have violated the provisions outlined in the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, sections 15(1) and 18(1).
- The Indian Constitution went into effect on January 26 while the court case was still pending. Later, on March 3, 1950, the petitioner filed a written statement challenging the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931’s definition of a “news sheet” as unconstitutional. In light of Article 13 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, the petitioner claimed that this definition was extra vires and void.
- In order for the High Court to make a decision on this legal problem, the petitioner requested that the legal procedures be put on hold. As a result, on March 7, 1950, a petition was filed in the High Court seeking a declaration that the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931’s sections 15(1) and 18(1) had no legal significance in light of Articles 13 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
- But on March 23, 1950, the Chief Presidency Magistrate formally filed charges against the petitioner in accordance with section 18 of the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931. In accordance with section 6 of the General Clauses Act, it was decided that the word “void” in Article 13 should be interpreted as “repealed” during the petition’s hearing in the High Court on April 12, 1950.
- The petitioner’s application was dismissed by the High Court after it determined that the legal proceedings under the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931 remained undisturbed, even in cases where the Act was in conflict with the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Subsequently, using the High Court’s certificate granted in accordance with article 132(1) of the constitution, the petitioner filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.
keshavan madhava menon v state of Bombay Issues
- Is article 19(1)(a) of the indian constitution and article 13 of the indian constitution of 1950 in conflict with Sections 15 and 18 of the indian press emergency powers act 1931?
- Will the execution of the Indian Constitution taint ongoing proceedings?
- Is there any retroactive effect of article 13 of the indian constitution?
Contentions by the Parties
Petitioner:
- In this case, the petitioner claimed that the pamphlet in question fit the definition of a “book” under the Press and Registration of Books Act (1867). They stated that the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931 was an oppressive piece of law established by a foreign government to restrict the freedom of Indian citizens, especially the freedom of the press, and that all of the Act’s provisions had been scrupulously followed.
- The petitioner further noted that India’s citizens are granted fundamental rights by the Constitution, which was drafted by the country’s people. article 13 of the indian constitution declared any laws that were in conflict with the document to be void, as if they had never been passed or existed, with the goal of eradicating any remaining traces of submission to harsh foreign laws.
Respondent:
- However, the respondent contended that the pamphlet in question met the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931’s definition of a “news sheet.” They argued that the pamphlet should have been penalized under the same Act since it was published without the required authorization specified in the Act.
- The court was confronted with these contrasting arguments to evaluate and resolve.
keshavan madhava menon v state of Bombay Judgment
By Justice Sudhi Ranjan Das:
- Unless expressly made retrospective or required by consequences, all statutes have prospective effect.
- Article 13 is entirely prospective and cannot have any retrospective effects.
- Laws that violate fundamental rights do not automatically become null and void. They are null and void only to the extent that they infringe upon basic rights.
- The expiration of temporary statutes has a different effect than article 13 of the indian constitution.
- The Indian Constitution of 1950 does not guarantee anyone the right to be free from prosecution and punishment for crimes done prior to the document’s adoption.
- The appeal is turned down.
By Justices Saiyid Fazl Ali, and Justice B.K. Mukherjea:
- The words “shall stand abrogated” were originally introduced by the Constituent Assembly of India in the draft of the Indian Constitution. Later, under article 13 of the indian constitution, the words “shall be void” took their place.
- It would have been simpler to argue under Section 6 of the General Clauses Act if the words “shall stand abrogated” had been retained, but they were removed.
- Only in Articles 13 and 154, where one law is opposed to another of greater holiness, is the word “void” employed.
- Without a doubt, Article 13(1) does not apply retroactively.
- Actions filed, prosecuted, and resolved under a statute that is deemed dead cannot be reopened.
- Charges cannot be brought against someone or a person found guilty if the legislation that made the act of an offense null and void.
By Justice M C Mahajan:
- The petitioner did not have the freedom of expression that the Indian Constitution guarantees when they published the pamphlet, nor did they have any fundamental rights.
- When a legislation is in effect, it gives people rights, imposes penalties, and is upheld by the courts; when it is repealed, it is totally nullified and void, which defies logic as it was never approved by parliament.
- He rejects the appeal as well.
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf
