Eyes of Corporate Print Media Houses of the world set on SC judgement in Rs.200 crore Dainik Hindustan Advertisement Scam

By ShriKrishna Prasad, Advocate

New Delhi : The Supreme Court of India is to hear the Special Leave Petition(Criminal) No. 1603 of 2013 of the Chairperson of M/S Hindustan Times Limited/M/S Hindustan Media Ventures Limited,Kasturba Gandhi Marg,New Delhi,Shobhana Bhartia on December 16 next in connection with the world famous Rs. 200 crore Dainik Hindustan Advertisement Scam of Bihar. Now, the eyes of the Corporate Media Houses of the world are fixed on the judgement of the Supreme Court as it will have a wide ranging effect on the future functioning of the print media houses of India.

The rarest case of forgery,cheatings and fraud on part of the Corporate Media House:It is rare among therarest cases of forgery,cheatings and fraud on part of the powerful media house of India, M/S Hindustan Times Limited/M/S Hindustan Media Ventures Limited,Kasturba Gandhi Marg,New Delhi. In the interest of the nation, I am going to print the content of the Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 1603 of 2013 of the Chairperson of M/S Hindustan Times Limited,New Delhi, Shobhana Bhartia (who is the petitioner in the Supreme Court) and the Counter-Affidavit of the social activist of Munger(Bihar), Mantoo Sharma(who is the Respondent No.02 in the Supreme Court).

Shobhana Bhartia prays to quash the F.I.R while Mantoo Sharma prays to dismiss Shobhana Bhartia's S.L.P : In the Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 1603 of 2013 in the Supreme Court of India, the petitioner , Shobhana Bhartia prays to the Hon'ble Court to quash the Munger Kotwali P.S case No. 445 of 2011(Munger,Bihar) and to set aside the judgement of the Patna High Court dated Dec 17,2012 last while the Respondent No. 02, the social activist,Mantoo Sharma, in his Counter- Affidavit, prays to Hon'ble Court to dismiss the S.L.P No. 1603 of 2013 of the petitioner,Shobhana Bhartia, to order a separate C.B.I probe into the State Level government advertisement scam of Bihar and to seize the printing presses of the petitioner in Bhagalpur amd Muzaffarpur in Bihar.

What are the contents in the S.L.P of Shobhna Bhartia and in the Counter-Affidavit of Mantoo Sharma :What the petitioner,Shobhana Bhartia says in her S.L.P(Criminal) No.1603 of 2013 and what the Respondent No. 02,Mantoo Sharma (Munger,Bihar) says in his Counter-Affidavit are given below in the original form.

The petitioner,Shobhana Bhartia says in the Synopsis of her S.L.P,

"Synopsis-By way of the present Special Leave Petition, the petitioner seeks the setting aside of order dated 17-12-2012 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2951 of 2012 and the quashing of the F.I.R No. 445/ 2011 , dated 18-11-2011 which contains no allegations at all against the petitioner.The F.I.R was registered at Police Station,Kotwali,Sadar,Munger,Bihar alleging commission of offences u/s 420,471 & 476 of the India Penal Code and sections 8 B, 14 & 15 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. At present, the said F.I.R is pending adjudication before the court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,Munger,Bihar and the petitioner seeks the quashing of the said F.I.R and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

Disgruntled former associates of the company behind the case :

It is pertinent to mention at the very outset that the advocate for the Complainant in the instant matter and his son are disgruntled former associates of the newspaper "Hindustan" who have filed the said complaint after their dismissal from work with the sole aim of causing undue harassment to the petitioner.The advocate for the complainant and his son were contributing articles in the said newspaper and after being disassociated with the owners of the newspaer at relevant point of time, filed several labour related cases against the newspaper/company and have got the said complaint filed with ulterior motives in order to cause undue harassment to the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention here that the dominant objective is malafide and this also apparent from the fact that unrealistic and imaginary figures are mentioned in the complaint.Furthermore, Sh.R.B.Roy,Ld,Additional Public Prosecutor himslef made a complaint to the court that the complainant has been over anxious in the present case and had sent a scurrilous email to the Advocate General ,Bihar.

That on 18-10-2011, a complaint was filed before the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate,Munger u/s 200, Cr.P.C., 1973, and vide its order dated 05 November 2011, in exercise of his power u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate directed the police to register an F.I.R and on receipt of the copy of complaint case No. 993(C)/2011, the Kotwali Sadar Police, Munger registered F.I.R. No. 445/2011 under the aforementioned sections.

A bare perusal of the complaint shows that the complaint is absolutely silent about the role of the Petitioner and there are no allegations/ avertments against her.The Complainant refers to an imaginary revenue loss but it fails to show how the said imaginary figure was calculated or arrived at. The malice of the Complainant is further substantiated by the fact that the Complainant initiated these fake and frivolous proceedings in Munger where he himself resides and is well connected, and not in Bhagalpur, the place that the alleged offence pertains to.

The Respondent No.02,Mantoo Sharma (Munger,Bihar) says in the Synopsis of his Counter-Affidavit,

"The Synopsis: The Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 and The Registration of Newspapers (Central) Rules, 1956(the amended Act) say that if any new company has to print & publish a newspaper , the company has to go through all legal processes under the above mentioned acts.Legal procedures which are mandatory are given below:-

At first, the Company of a new newspaper has to file a Declaration ( An application in the prescribed Form-01 for issuance of '' the Certificate of Registration '' & " the Registration Number") under section 5(2) of The Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 before the District Magistrate/The Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the concerned district under whose local jurisdiction such newspaper is going to to printed or published.

The Section 5 of The Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 has set forth Rules as to the printing and publication of newspapers in details:

And, the section 5(2) of The Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 thus says :-

The Printer and the Publisher of every such newspaper shall appear in person or by agent authorised in this behalf in accordance with rules made under section 20, before a District Magistrate,Presidency Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction such newspaper shall be printed or published, and shall make and subscribe, in duplicate in the prescribed printed form (that is known as Form-01 under Chapter "Schedule").

In the Declaration(the form of an application for issuance of 'The Certificate of Registration' and ' The Registration Number") , the Printer and the Publisher of the newspaper give the details of particulars of the proposed printing or publication of a newspaper viz,(1) the title of the newspaper,(2) language of newspaper in which it is to be published,(3) periodicity of publication, (4) retail selling price of the newspaper per copy,(5) publisher's name and address,(6) place of printing and name of the printing press where the newspaper is actually printed and the true and precise description of the premises on which the press is installed, (7) place of publication, (8) Printer's name, (9) Owner's names,(10) particulars of the firm, the Joint Stock Company, the Trust, etc.

By ShriKrishna Prasad, Advocate (M- 09470400813)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *