B.B.A iiLL.

B ii(H) ii/ iiSecond iisemester

ii2020 iiLegal iiEnglish iifinal iidraft

Research iiproject iitopic

iiSatyarth iiPrakash
For iithe iiban iiof iithe
iibook ii(book)

Submitted to Mrs. Reema Chaudhary

Submitted iiby Anura Biyani
1
2
Contents
Introduction iiof iibook ii

3 iiFacts iiof iithe iicase ii

5 iiJudicial iiPrecedents ii

6 iiLegal iiIssues iiinvolved ii

7 iiArguments ii

8 iiConclusion

10

3
Title ii– iiSatyarth iiPrakash

Introduction iiof iibook

Dayanand iiSaraswati iiwas iian iiIndian iiphilosopher, iisocial iileader iiand
iifounder iiof iithe iiArya iiSamaj, iia iireform iimovement iiof iithe iiVedic
iidharma. iiHe iiwas iithe iifirst iito iigive iithe iicall iifor iiSwaraj iias ii"India
iifor iiIndians" iiin ii1876, iia iicall iilater iitaken iiup iiby iiLokmanya iiTilak. ii
iiSatyarth iiPrakash ii iiThe iiLight iiof iiTruth iiis iia ii1875 iibook iiwritten
iioriginally iiin iiHindi iiby iiDayanand iiSaraswati ii(Swami iiDayanand), iian
iiinfluential iireligious iiand iisocial iireformer iiand iithe iifounder ii iiof iiArya
iiSamaj. iiIt iiis iiconsidered iione iiof iihis iimajor iischolarly iiworks. iiThe
iibook iiwas iisubsequently iirevised iiby iiSwami iiDayanand iiSaraswati iiin
ii1882 iiand iihas iinow iibeen iitranslated iiinto iimore iithan ii20 iilanguages
iiincluding iiSanskrit iiand iiseveral foreign languages like iiEnglish, iiFrench,
iiGerman, iiSwahili, iiArabic iiand iiChinese. iiThe iimajor iiportion iiof iithe
iibook iiis iidedicated iito iilaying iidown iithe iireformist iiadvocacy iiof
iiSwami iDayanand iwith ithe ilast ithree ichapters imaking ia icase ifor
icomparative istudy iof idifferent ireligious ifaiths. iSatlok iAshram ileader
iRampal icriticized isections iof ithe ibook iin i2006 iwhich iled ito iclashes
ibetween ifollowers iof iArya iSamaj iand iSatlok iAshram iand ione iperson
idied iin ithat iviolence. iThe iiSatyarth iiPrakash ii(The iilight iiof iiTruth) iiis
iithe iimasterpiece iiof iiSwami iiDayanand iiSaraswati. iiSome iicall iiit iias
iiMagnum iiOpus. iiNo iidoubt, iiit iiis iia iigreat iiliterary iiundertaking, iiBut iias
iithe iigreat iiwriter iiof iithis iimasterpiece iiSwami iiDayanand iiwas iia
iisymbol iiof iiultimate iimorality iiand iispiritualism iiand iiwas iia iisage iiof
iistanding, iihe iinever iitouched iia iidrop iiof iiwine. iiAnd iiso iihis iipresent
iiwork iidoes iinot iicontain iiany iisuch iialcoholic iiimpact. iiBut iione
iithing iiis iiundoubtedly

4
true iiabout iiit1. iiThis iigreat, iibook ii(Satyarth iiPrakash) iiis, iiindeed,
iiand iiencyclopedia iiof iithe iivarious iicontemporary iisocial iireligious
iiand iipolitical iicurrents iicross-currents iiand iimovements iigoing iion iiat iithe
iitime iiof iithe iiwriter’s iilife. iiTo iigo iiit iifurther, iithe iiwriter iihas iinot
iispared iithe iipast iievents iiand iiguiding iiphilosophies, iiwhich iihas
iipolluted iithe iihuman iimind iiand iideteriorated iithe iiman’s iiquest iifor
iitrue iiknowledge iiand iiright iiway iiof iilife2.

5
1 iiwww.banbooks.com

2 iiBiography iiof iidayanand iisaraswati

6
Facts iiof iithe iicase
The iiground iito iiimpose iia iiban iion iithe iipublication iiof iithe iibook iiwas
iibased iion iithe iilikelihood iiof iithe iibook iito iidisturb iipublic iiorder.
iiIssued iiagainst iithe iipublishers iiand iicertain iiArya iiSamba iiOrganizations,
iirestraining iithem iifrom iipublishing, iiprinting iiand iidistributing ii'Satyarth
iiPrakash' iiin iiany iilanguage. iiSatyartha iiPrakash iiwas iibanned iiin iisome
iiprincely iistates iiand iiin iiSindh iiin ii1944 iiand iiis iistill iibanned iiin
iiSindh. ii"Satyarth iiPrakash" iidefines iithe iiideology iipropounded iiby iiArya
iiSamaj iifounder iiwho iifirst iipublished iiit iiin ii1875 iiand iithen iirevised iiit iiin
ii1882, iiwhich iicreated iia iimajor iiimpact iiespecially iiin iinorth iiIndia. iiIt iihas
iisince iibeen iitranslated iiin iiover ii20 iiIndian iiand iiforeign iilanguages.

By iiwords, iieither iispoken iior iiwritten, iior iiby iisigns iior iiby iivisible
iirepresentations iior iiotherwise, iipromotes iior iiattempts iito iipromote, iion
iigrounds iiof iireligion, iirace, iiplace iiof iibirth, iiresidence, iilanguage, iicaste iior
iicommunity iior iiany iiother iiground iiwhatsoever, iidisharmony iior iifeelings
iiof iienmity, iihatred iior iiill-will iibetween iidifferent iireli¬gious, iiracial,
iilanguage iior iiregional iigroups iior iicastes iior iicommuni¬ties, iior iicommits
iiany iiact iiwhich iiis iiprejudicial iito iithe iimaintenance iiof iiharmony
iibetween iidifferent iireligious, iiracial, iilanguage iior iiregional iigroups iior
iicastes iior iicommunities, iiand iiwhich iidisturbs iior iiis iilikely iito iidisturb
iithe iipublic iitranquility iishall iibe iipunished iiwith iiimprisonment iiwhich
iimay iiextend iito iithree iiyears, iior iiwith iifine, iior iiwith iiboth. iiOffence
iicommitted iiin iiplace iiof iiworship, iietc. iiWhoever iicommits iian iioffence
iispecified iiin iisub-section ii(1) iiin iiany iiplace iiof iiworship iior iiin iiany
iiassembly iiengaged iiin iithe iiperformance iiof iireligious iiwor¬ship iior
iireligious iiceremonies, iishall iibe iipunished iiwith iiimprisonment iiwhich
iimay iiextend iito iifive iiyears iiand iishall iialso iibe iiliable iito iifinethe ii3.

3 iiThe iiIndian iiconstitution ii1949

7
Section ii95 iiin iiThe iiCode iiOf iiCriminal iiProcedure, ii1973

95. iiPower iito iideclare iicertain iipublications iiforfeited iiand iito iiissue iisearch
iiwarrants iifor iithe iisame. iiWhere-

(a) iiany iinewspaper, iior iibook, iior i i any iidocument, iiwherever iiprinted,
iiappears iito iithe iiState iiGovernment iito iicontain iiany iimatter iithe
iipublication iiof iiwhich iiis iipunishable iiunder iisection iithe iiState
iiGovernment iimay, iiby iinotification, iistating iithe iigrounds iiof iiits
iiopinion, iideclare iievery iicopy iiof iithe iiissue iiof iithe iinewspaper
iicontaining iisuch iimatter, iiand iievery iicopy iiof iisuch iibook iior iiother
iidocument iito iibe iiforfeited iito iiGovernment, iiand iithereupon iiany iipolice
iiofficer iimay iiseize iithe iisame iiwherever iifound iiin iiIndia iiand iiany
iiMagistrate iimay iiby iiwarrant iiauthorise iiany iipolice iiofficer iinot iibelow
iithe iirank iiof iisub- iiinspector iito iienter iiupon iiand iisearch iifor iithe iisame
iiin iiany iipremises iiwhere iiany iicopy iiof iisuch iiissue iior iiany iisuch
iibook iior iiother iidocument iimay iibe iior iimay iibe iireasonably iisuspected
iito iibe4.

Article ii19 iiin iiThe iiConstitution iiOf iiIndia ii1949

All iicitizens iishall iihave iithe iiright iito iifreedom iiof iispeech iiand
iiexpression; iiNothing iiin iithe iiclause iishall iiaffect iithe iioperation iiof
iiany iiexisting iilaw, iior iiprevent iithe iiState iifrom iimaking iiany iilaw,
iiin iiso iifar iias iisuch iilaw iiimposes iireasonable iirestrictions iion iithe
iiexercise iiof iithe iiright iiconferred iiby iithe iisaid iisub iiclause iiin iithe
iiinterests iiof iithe iisovereignty iiand iiintegrity iiof iiIndia, iithe iisecurity
iiof iithe iiState, iifriendly iirelations iiwith iiforeign iiStates, iipublic iiorder,
iidecency iior iimorality iior iiin iirelation iito iicontempt iiof iicourt,
iidefamation iior

8
4 iiThe iiCode iiOf iiCriminal iiProcedure, ii1973

9
incitement iito iian iioffence5.

Judicial iiPrecedents
Narayan iiDass iiIndurakhya iiVs. iiState iiof iiMadhya iiPradesh ii(1972) ii3 iiSCC
ii676

There iiis iia iiconsiderable iibody iiof iistatutory iiprovisions iiwhich iienable iithe
iiState iito iicurtail iithe iiliberty iiof iithe iisubject iiin iithe iiinterest iiof iithe
iisecurity iiof iithe iiState iior iiforfeit iibooks iiand iidocuments iiwhen iiin iithe
iiopinion iiof iithe iiGovernment, iithey iipromote iiclass iihatred, iireligious
iiintolerance, iidisaffection iiagainst iithe iiState, iietc. iiIn iiall iisuch iicases,
iiinstances iiof iisome iiwhereof iiare iigiven iibelow iithe iiState iiGovernment
iihas iito iigive iithe iigrounds iiof iiits iiopinion. iiClearly iithe iigrounds
iimust iibe iidistinguished iifrom iithe iiopinion. iiGrounds iiof iithe iiopinion
iimust iimean iithe iiconclusion iiof iifacts iion iiwhich iithe iiopinion iiis iibased6.

Uttar iiPradesh iiVs. iiLalai iiSingh iiYadav ii(1976) ii4 iiSCC ii213

It iiis iia iifundamental iiprinciple, iilong iiestab- iilished, iithat iithe iifreedom iiof
iispeech iiand iiof iithe iipress, iiwhich iiis iisecured iiby iithe iiConstitution,
iidoes iinot iiconfer iian iiabsolute iiright iito iispeak iior iipublish, iiwithout
iiresponsibility, iiwhatever. iione iimay iichoose, iior iian iiunrestricted iiand
iiunbridled iilicence iithat iigives iiimmunity iifor iievery iipossible iiuse iiof
iilanguage iiand iiprevents iithe iipunishment iiof iithose iiwho iiabuse iithis
iifreedom7.

Legal iiIssues iiinvolved

Fundamental iiand iireligious iirights iioften iicome iiinto iiquestion iiwith
iirespect i i to

1
0
5 iiThe iiIndian iiconstitution ii1949

6( ii1972) ii3 iiSCC ii676

7 ii(1976) ii4 iiSCC ii213

1
1
Holy iitexts, iipractices iiand iibeliefs. iiDealing iiwith iiphilosopher iiSwami
iiDayanand's iifamous ii"Satyarth iiPrakash", iithe iipresent iisuit ii[Sarvadeshik
iiPress
v. Usman iiGhani iiand iiOrs. ii2009 ii(38) iiPTC ii67 ii(Del.)] iidwells iion iithe
iiquestion iiof iithe iiCivil iiCourt iihaving iithe iijurisdiction iito iientertain iia
iisuit iito iiban/issue iian iiinjunction iion iithe iipublication iiof iia iibook,
iiwhich iiis iiin iiexistence iiand iiis iibeing iipublished iiand iiread iifor iithe
iilast ii135 iiyears. iiThe iiground iito iiimpose iia iiban iion iithe iipublication iiof
iithe iibook iiwas iibased iion iithe iilikelihood iiof iithe iibook iito iidisturb
iipublic iiorder.

The iirespondents iiUsman iiGhani iiand iiothers iiwho iiconsider iithemselves

iito iibe ii'public iispirited iipersons' iifiled iia iisuit iiwith iithe iiobject iiof
iiprotecting iithe iireligious iifeelings iiof iiother iipersons iiof iithe iisame
iireligion iiseeking iia iideclaration iithat iipublication iiand iidistribution iiof
ii'Satyarth iiPrakash' iiwritten iiby iiSwami iiDayanand iiwas iiinjurious iito iithe
iireligious iifaith iiof iithe iiMuslim iiCommunity iiand iidemanded iia
iiperpetual iiinjunction iito iibe iiissued iiagainst iithe iipublishers iiand iicertain
iiArya iiSamba iiOrganizations, iirestraining iithem iifrom iipublishing, iiprinting
iiand iidistributing ii'Satyarth iiPrakash' iiin iiany iilanguage.

Arguments

1) Dayanand’s iiadvice iion iithe iimarriage iiof iia iigirl iichild

Article ii19 iiof iithe iiconstitution iigives iifreedom iiof iispeech iiand
iiexpression iito iithe iicitizens iiof iiIndia iibut iiimposes iireasonable
iirestrictions iion iithe iiexercise iiof iithe iiright iiconferred iiby iithe iisaid
iisub iiclause iiin iithe iiinterests iiof iithe iisovereignty iiand iiintegrity
1
2
iiof iiIndia, iithe iisecurity iiof iithe iiState,

1
3
 friendly iirelations iiwith iiforeign iiStates, iipublic iiorder, iidecency iior
iimorality iior iiin iirelation iito iicontempt iiof iicourt, iidefamation iior
iiincitement iito iian iioffence iiThe iibook iisatyarth iiprakash iishould
iibe iibanned iibecause iichapter ii14 iiof iithe iibook i i spreads
iiimmorality iiand iidisharmony iiamong iithe iipeople iias iiit iisays
iiseveral iithings iisuch iias iithe iicorrect iiage iiof iimarriage iifor
iiwomen iiis ii24 iiand iifor iimen iiis ii48 iiwhich iiis iiillegal iias iihow iia
iiwomen iican iimarry iia iimen iiwho iiis iijust iidouble iiof iiher iiage

Dayanand’s iiAdvise iifor iiquarrelsome iimen iiand iiwomen iiand iithose iiwomen
iiwhose iihusbands iihave iigone iiabroad

Dayanand iiprofesses iithat iiif iisomeone’s iiwife iiis iiquarrelsome iithen

iithe iihusband iishould iiimmediately iistop iicontact iiwith iihis iiwife
iiand iicontract ii“Niyoga” iiwith iianother iiwomen iiand iihave
iichildren. iiLikewise, iiif iithe iihusband iiis iioppressive, iithen iithe
iiwife iishould iicontract iiwith iianother iiman iiand iibear iichildren.

Likewise, iiDayanand iisays iithat iiif iisomeone’s iihusband iihas iigone

iiabroad iifor iia iiset iinumber iiof iiyears iiand iihasn’t iireturned iithen
iithe iiwife iishould iihave iisex iiwith iisome iiother iiman iiand iiraise
iichildren. iiDayanand iihas iiquoted iiManu iiin iisupport iiof iihis
iistatements.

Counter iiarguments

Satyartha iiprakash iishould iinot iibe iibanned

The iibook iisatyartha iiprakash iishould iibe iibanned iibecause iiit iiis
iiviolating iiSection ii153A iiin iiThe iiPenal iiCode iiwhich iisays iithat iiBy
iiwords, iieither iispoken iior iiwritten, iior iiby iisigns iior iiby iivisible
iirepresentations iior iiotherwise, iipromotes i i or
10
attempts iito iipromote, iion iigrounds iiof iireligion, iirace, iiplace iiof iibirth,
iiresidence, iilanguage, iicaste iior iicommunity iior iiany iiother iiground
iiwhatsoever, iidisharmony iior iifeelings iiof iienmity, iihatred iior iiill-will
iibetween iidifferent iireli¬gious, iiracial, iilanguage iior iiregional iigroups iior
iicastes iior iicommunities, iishall iibe iipunished iiwith iiimprisonment iiwhich
iimay iiextend iito iithree iiyears, iior iiwith iifine, iior iiwith iiboth. iiAccording
iito iithis iisection iithe iibook iishould iibe iibanned iias iiit iiis iicreating
iidisharmony iiin iithe iisociety iiand iiamong iidifferent iireligions. iiAlso iithe
iiart ii19 iiwhich iispeaks iiabout iithe iifreedom iiof iispeech iiand iiexpression
iibut iihas iisome iireasonable iirestrictions iiwhich iisays iithat iithe iiinterests
iiof ii iithe iisovereignty iiand iiintegrity iiof iiIndia, iithe iisecurity iiof iithe
iiState, iifriendly iirelations iiwith iiforeign iiStates, iipublic iiorder, iidecency
iior iimorality iior iiin iirelation iito iicontempt iiof iicourt, iidefamation iior
iiincitement iito iian iioffence iishould iibe iimaintained iibut iithe iibook iifails
iiin iidoing iiso iihence iishould iibe iibanned

Conclusion
The iiCourt iistated iithat iirestrictions iion iireligious iibooks iior iibanning
iipublication iiof iicertain iiworks, iiinvolves iiconstitutional iiissues iiand
iicannot iibe iientertained iiby iiCivil iiCourts. iiThe iiCourt iisuggested iithat iithe
iisame iibe iiraised iionly iiby iiway iiof iiWrit iiPetitions. iiIn iimatters iiof
iireligious iinature, iiit iiwas iistated iithat iino iicivil iirights iiare
iiendangered. iiThe iiCourt iidrew iithe iianalogy iithat iiadmitting iisuch iia
iisuit iimight iilead iito iiothers iifrom iiany iiother iicommunity iifiling iia iisuit iifor
iithe iiban iiof iiThe iiBible, iiThe iiQuran, iiThe iiGita iior iisuch iiother
iireligious iitexts. iiThe iiCourt iistated iithat iiit iiis iinot iithe iiprovince iior
iiduty iiof iithe iiCourt iito iipronounce iion iithe iitruthfulness iiof iireligious
iitenants iior iireasonableness iiof iithe iicontents iiof iireligious iibooks iior
iito iiregulate iithe iireligious iisentiments iiand iifeelings iiof iithe iisections
i i of i i society. i i They i i stated i i that i i the i i suits i i demanding i i the

11
i i relief i i of

12
permanent iiinjunction iion iiReligious iibooks iiwere iilikely iito iiarouse iior
iiinjure iithe iireligious iifeelings iiand iidisturb iipeace iiand iiharmony iiare iiin
iifact iimeant iito iiplay iimischief iiin iithe iisociety iiand iiby iifiling iisuch
iisuits iithe iiplaintiffs iiwould iiget iinothing, iibut iicheap iipublicity iiand
iicreate iisome iimore iidisharmony iiand iidisturbance iiin iithe iisociety.
iiThe iiCourt iistated iithat iisuch iiquestions iiwere iithe iisubject iiof iiArticle
ii225 iiof iithe iiConstitution iiof iiIndia

The iiHigh iiCourt iialso iilooked iiinto iithe iiprovisions iiof iithe iiCriminal
iiProcedure iiCode iiin iithe iiregard iiforfeiture iiand iibanning iiof
iipublications. iiIn iiview iiof iithe iispecific iiprovisions iimade iiby iilaw
iifor iiforfeiture iiof iisuch iipublications, iithe iiHigh iiCourt iistated iithat
iiCivil iiCourts iihad iino iijurisdiction iito iientertain iithe iisuit.

The iiCourt iistated iithat iiin iiview iiof ii'Satyarth iiPrakash' iiadmittedly iibeing
iiwritten ii135 iiyears iiago iiand iihaving iibeen iiin iipublication/distribution
iisince, iithe iisame iihas iinot iicaused iiany iiill-will iiand iidamage iito iithe
iisociety. iiThe iiCivil iiCourt iiwas iisaid iito iihave iibeen iiincapable iiof
iientertaining iithe iisuit iiof iiinjunction iiand iideclaration iiagainst iia iibook
iiwith iia iistanding iiof iiover ii135 iiyears iimerely iibased iion iithe iiclaim iiof
iitwo iipersons, iiconsidering iithemselves iito iibe ii'public iispirited'
iiindividuals. iiThe iisuit iipending iibefore iithe iiTrial iiCourt iiwas
iipronounced iidismissed iiowing iito iithe iisame iibeing iibeyond iithe
iijurisdiction iiof iithe iiCivil iiCourt.

13