{"id":209324,"date":"2009-03-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-07-23T03:38:57","modified_gmt":"2017-07-22T22:08:57","slug":"whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: S. S. Shinde<\/div>\n
                                1\n\n\n\n                            \/\/REPORTABLE\/\/\n\n          CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.59 OF 2009.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                     \n                       Date of decision : 2nd MARCH, 2009.\n\n\n\n\n                                             \n    For approval and signature.\n\n\n\n\n                                            \n    THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE.\n\n\n    1.   Whether Reporters of Local Papers                  }\n         may be allowed to see the judgment?                }      Yes.\n\n\n\n\n                                   \n    2.   To be referred to the Reporter or not?             }      Yes\n\n    3.\n                    \n         Whether Their Lordships wish to see\n         the fair copy of the judgment?                     }      No.\n\n    4.   Whether this case involves a substantial           }\n                   \n         question of law as to the interpretation           }\n         of the Constitution of India, 1950 or              }\n         any Order made thereunder?                         }      No.\n\n    5.   Whether it is to be circulated to the              }\n         Civil Judges?                                      }      No.\n      \n\n\n    6.   Whether the case involves an important             }\n   \n\n\n\n         question of law and whether a copy of              }\n         the judgment should be sent to Mumbai,             }\n         Nagpur and Panaji offices?                         }      No.\n\n\n\n\n\n      [Prakash Kadam]\n    Private Secretary to\n    the Honourable Judge.\n\n\n\n\n\n                                             ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::\n                                        1\n\n\n\n\n             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                             \n             CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.59 OF 2009.\n\n\n\n\n                                                    \n    Ravi s\/o Santoshkumar Shukla,\n    age 31 years, Occu. Business,\n    R\/o Jingar Galli, Hingoli,\n    Tq. & Dist. Hingoli.                        .... APPLICANT.\n                                                ( Ori. Accused ).\n\n\n\n\n                                                   \n                           VERSUS\n\n    The State of Maharashtra.           ....   RESPONDENTS.\n                                               RESPONDENTS\n\n                           ...\n\n\n\n\n                                          \n    Shri V.P. Latange, Advocate for applicant.\n    Shri J.S. Gavane, A.P.P. for State.\n                           \n                           ...\n\n                                    CORAM:   S.S. SHINDE, J.\n                          \n                                    DATE :   2nd MARCH, 2009.\n\n                           Date of reserving\n                           the Judgment.            : 24.02.2009.\n\n                           Date of pronouncing\n      \n\n\n                           the Judgment.            : 02.03.2009.\n   \n\n\n\n    JUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    1.       This      revision       application         is       filed<\/p>\n
    challenging the final judgment and order passed by<\/p>\n
    the Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli in Criminal<\/p>\n
    Appeal    No.7\/2005       dated    10th February,          2009      by<\/p>\n
    which the Addl.         Sessions Judge, Hingoli confirmed<\/p>\n
    the   judgment         and order of conviction        dated        8th<\/p>\n
    February,       2005    passed in R.C.C.     No.332\/2000             by<\/p>\n
    the J.M.F.C., Hingoli.\n<\/p>\n
                                                    ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
    2.        Rule.        Rule    is made returnable             forthwith<\/p>\n
    and heard finally.\n<\/p>\n
    3.        That      the complainant Mugaji Namaji                  Narode<\/p>\n
    filed        complaint on 4.4.1996 alleging that when he<\/p>\n
    was     supervising       in     examination         hall      no.4       at<\/p>\n
    Bhartiya        Vidyamandir,      Hingoli      and      one      Prakash<\/p>\n
    Ambhore       was supervising in the hall No.5, Prakash<\/p>\n
    Ambhore       called the complainant and told that                      one<\/p>\n
    student Shukla was copying in the said examination<\/p>\n
    hall     from<\/p>\n
                        answer sheet of another           student.            At<\/p>\n
    that time the Mr.             Ambhore warned the said student<\/p>\n
    not     to     copy.     At that time the student ran                 away<\/p>\n
    alongwith          question and answer sheet, that time he<\/p>\n
    told     to the student that he knows his parents and<\/p>\n
    he     will give understanding to them.                   Thereafter,<\/p>\n
    the     concerned       supervisor went to do his work                    in<\/p>\n
    hall     no.5.         Then, at about 9.20 a.m.               the     said<\/p>\n
    student Shukla along with his brother came towards<\/p>\n
    hall     no.5, at that time, the concerned supervisor<\/p>\n
    was     standing       near     the door of hall          no.4.         The<\/p>\n
    brother       of     the said student Shukla came                towards<\/p>\n
    Prakash Ambhore and assaulted him by means of hand<\/p>\n
    blows.          Therefore,       the       complainant        tried       to<\/p>\n
    intervene          in the said quarrel, but brother of the<\/p>\n
                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                          3<\/span><\/p>\n
    student        caught     hold his collar and             pressed        his<\/p>\n
    neck.     Thereafter, he brought the said student and<\/p>\n
    his     brother        towards office of the           Head       Master.\n<\/p>\n
    Thereafter        his     brother        and father came          in     the<\/p>\n
    office     of     Head Master.           At that time brother              of<\/p>\n
    student        Shukla caught hold his collar and pressed<\/p>\n
    his     neck     and father of said student Shukla                     gave<\/p>\n
    hand     blow on his nose.           Blood started oozing from<\/p>\n
    his     nose.      Then     second brother of             Shukla        also<\/p>\n
    assaulted        him by means of slaps and abused him in<\/p>\n
    filthy     language on his caste.              At that time            they<\/p>\n
    also<\/p>\n
             threatened to kill him.              One Sheshrao Kadam,<\/p>\n
    Anand      Puri,        Prakash      Ambhore,       Maroti        Thorat,<\/p>\n
    Dadarao        Mhaske     and     Chagan      Bansode       and        other<\/p>\n
    teachers        intervened said quarrel.            Thereafter, he<\/p>\n
    went     towards        Hingoli     town     police       Station        and<\/p>\n
    lodged     the     complaint        against       accused.          Police<\/p>\n
    registered         Crime          No.54\/1996          for       offences<\/p>\n
    punishable        under Sections 353, 448, 324, 504, 506<\/p>\n
    r.w.      34     of     I.P.C.      and     u\/s    3(1)(x)        of     the<\/p>\n
    Scheduled        Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention<\/p>\n
    of     Atrocities)       Act.     Further      investigation             was<\/p>\n
    carried.         During the course of investigation, the<\/p>\n
    Investigating           Officer     visited         the     spot.          He<\/p>\n
    prepared         panchanama         of      the    spot,        recorded<\/p>\n
    statements        of     witnesses and after completion                    of<\/p>\n
                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                             4<\/span><\/p>\n
    investigation,           filed         charge-sheet                for        the<\/p>\n
    aforesaid offences.             One accused Amar was juvenile<\/p>\n
    and    his      trial     was         separated.           The      case      was<\/p>\n
    committed        to     the     Sessions Court,             Parbhani          and<\/p>\n
    thereafter        it was transferred to Addl.                        Sessions<\/p>\n
    Court at Hingoli.\n<\/p>\n
    4.        In     view of the order passed below Exh.1 by<\/p>\n
    the    Sessions Judge, accused persons were                            charged<\/p>\n
    for    an      offence        under    Section        3(1)(x)          of     the<\/p>\n
    Atrocities        Act and the matter was transferred                            to<\/p>\n
    C.J.M., Parbhani for trial against accused persons<\/p>\n
    in respect of remaining charges.\n<\/p>\n
    5.        J.M.F.C.            framed        charges         against           the<\/p>\n
    accused        nos.1     and     2 below          Exh.12      for      offence<\/p>\n
    punishable        under Sections 353, 448, 323, 324, 504<\/p>\n
    and    506 r.w.         34 of I.P.C.          The J.M.F.C.               framed<\/p>\n
    necessary         points       for      its        determination              and<\/p>\n
    recorded        the findings.          In paragraphs 7 to 14 the<\/p>\n
    J.M.F.C.         has     discussed          the      evidence          of     the<\/p>\n
    witnesses        and     in para 15 the court has                    recorded<\/p>\n
    findings.\n<\/p>\n
    6.        The     J.M.F.C.       after scanning the                  evidence<\/p>\n
    of    prosecution        came to the conclusion                    that       the<\/p>\n
                                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
    complainant           Mugaji Narwade was working as teacher<\/p>\n
    in   the said school and at that time,                             examination<\/p>\n
    of   8th    and        9th        standard        was    going        on.       The<\/p>\n
    testimony        of        the     complainant          appeared           to     be<\/p>\n
    consistent           with the complaint below Exh.23.                           The<\/p>\n
    Magistrate            has        further         discussed         about        the<\/p>\n
    evidence        of     other        witnesses         and     came       to     the<\/p>\n
    conclusion           that    the testimony of                the      witnesses<\/p>\n
    corroborates           the       version       of     each      other.          The<\/p>\n
    J.M.F.C.             has         recorded         findings          that        the<\/p>\n
    prosecution           proved       that accused nos.1 and 2,                      in<\/p>\n
    furtherance of their common intention, voluntarily<\/p>\n
    caused     hurt to the complainant and                        intentionally<\/p>\n
    committed trespass by entering the school building<\/p>\n
    with an intention to commit offence.                            The J.M.F.C.\n<\/p>\n
    convicted        the        accused        and      directed        to     suffer<\/p>\n
    sentence of S.I.             for six months and to pay a fine<\/p>\n
    of   Rs.500\/-,          in default, to suffer S.I.                       for      15<\/p>\n
    days.\n<\/p>\n
    7.        The        Addl.        Sessions          Judge,      Hingoli         has<\/p>\n
    partly     allowed           the appeal filed by                the      accused<\/p>\n
    persons.         The        order passed by the J.M.F.C.                        was<\/p>\n
    modified        in respect of Santoshkumar s\/o Sidhanath<\/p>\n
    Shukla     only        and        sentence       of     imprisonment            was<\/p>\n
    reduced     but, his sentence of fine was                          confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                           6<\/span><\/p>\n
    So     far     as     present applicant is          concerned,          the<\/p>\n
    Addl.         Sessions      Judge,        Hingoli    dismissed          his<\/p>\n
    appeal        by confirming the sentence imposed by                     the<\/p>\n
    J.M.F.C.\n<\/p>\n
    8.        The       learned      Counsel     for     the     applicant<\/p>\n
    submitted        that the Head Master of the said school<\/p>\n
    is     not examined.          The evidence of the prosecution<\/p>\n
    witnesses        is not consistent with each other,                     the<\/p>\n
    witnesses           have    not     stated     the    time       of     the<\/p>\n
    incident.           The complainant was not the supervisor<\/p>\n
    on<\/p>\n
           the said hall in which the student was                       giving<\/p>\n
    examination.            He further submitted that there                   is<\/p>\n
    material        variance      in     the version of        the       three<\/p>\n
    witnesses.            Therefore,      the       learned          Counsel<\/p>\n
    submitted        that      both    the courts       have     committed<\/p>\n
    error        in convicting the applicant.             It is further<\/p>\n
    submitted        that      the     place of the      incident         also<\/p>\n
    differ        from the statement of three witnesses, the<\/p>\n
    prosecution has not examined the Chief Invigilator<\/p>\n
    of     the     examination and the prosecution                 has      not<\/p>\n
    brought       any     evidence on record to show that                   the<\/p>\n
    concerned        supervisor        was assigned duty           on     hall<\/p>\n
    no.5     at     the     relevant time.         According         to     the<\/p>\n
    learned       Counsel, material ingredients of                   section<\/p>\n
    353     are     not fulfilled.         It is further         submitted<\/p>\n
                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                           7<\/span><\/p>\n
    that     both the courts are not correct in                       awarding<\/p>\n
    the      sentence        under      Section      448        of         I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
    According to him, the parents of the students have<\/p>\n
    every right to enter in the premises of the school<\/p>\n
    to     verify        the complaint made by their                 son.        He<\/p>\n
    further        submitted      that    the version           of     Prakash<\/p>\n
    Ambhore        is not corroborated by medical                  evidence.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                          \n    Both     the     courts       below have treated            him        as    an\n\n    injured        eye     witness but, no medical              certificate\n\n    was     produced        to    show that he       had      received           an\n\n\n\n\n                                             \n    injury.         Therefore,       it    is     submitted          that       the\n\n    applicant        deserves\n                             ig    to     be acquitted of             all       the\n\n    charges.\n                           \n    9.        The learned A.P.P.              invited my attention to\n\n    the     findings recorded by the learned J.M.F.C.                           as\n      \n\n\n    well     as     the revisional Court and submitted                      that\n   \n\n\n\n    the     evidence brought on record by the prosecution\n\n<\/pre>\n
    is overwhelming and fully supports the prosecution<\/p>\n
    case.         There are concurrent findings recorded                        by<\/p>\n
    the     courts        below   after         appreciation          of        the<\/p>\n
    evidnece        and     therefore,        this    court          may        not<\/p>\n
    interfere        in the well reasoned judgment and order<\/p>\n
    passed by both the courts below.\n<\/p>\n
    10.       I     have     heard the learned Counsel for                      the<\/p>\n
                                                           ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                                 8<\/span><\/p>\n
    applicant,             the     learned      A.P.P.        for     State        and<\/p>\n
    perused          the        entire      compilation        including           the<\/p>\n
    application,             judgments of the courts below and                       I<\/p>\n
    am     of        the    considered view that the                 offence        in<\/p>\n
    question          is        very     serious     in     nature        and      the<\/p>\n
    J.M.F.C.              has recorded findings based upon cogent<\/p>\n
    and consistent evidence of the eye witnesses.                                 The<\/p>\n
    evidence          of P.Ws.           6 to 9 fully supports the case<\/p>\n
    of the prosecution.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                   \n    11.         The        evidence of P.W.1 Mugaji Narwade below\n\n    exh.22        shows\n                                 \n                                 that     on 4.4.96 he was           working        as\n\n    teacher          in     the said school.              He was on        duty     in\n                                \n<\/pre>\n
    examination             hall no.4 adjacent to hall no.5.                        At<\/p>\n
    about        9     a.m.        he     supplied        answer     sheets        and<\/p>\n
    question          papers        to     the students.            One     Prakash<\/p>\n
    Ambhore          was examiner in hall no.5.                 The       evidence<\/p>\n
    of     complainant            and      Prakash         Ambhore        who      was<\/p>\n
    examiner          in        hall     no.5   corroborates          with        each<\/p>\n
    other.           The evidence of P.W.6 Prakash Ambhore who<\/p>\n
    is     an        injured       eye     witness shows        that        on     the<\/p>\n
    relevant          date        he     was on duty in        hall        no.5     as<\/p>\n
    examiner.              At     that time one student              Shukla        was<\/p>\n
    found copying and he asked the student not to copy<\/p>\n
    from        another          student’s answer sheet.               The        said<\/p>\n
    student          ran        away and came along with his                    father<\/p>\n
                                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                               9<\/span><\/p>\n
    and     brother.        They assaulted Prakash Ambhore                       and<\/p>\n
    also     the complainant.              Accused no.2 who is father<\/p>\n
    of the accused no.1 gave hand blows on nose of the<\/p>\n
    complainant           and    blood      started oozing            from       his<\/p>\n
    nose.\n<\/p>\n
    12.       The        evidence       of other witnesses PW 8                  Dr.<\/p>\n
    Laxman     Galande           who was doctor on duty               in        Civil<\/p>\n
    Hospital        at     Hingoli         supports the        case        of        the<\/p>\n
    prosecution.            On     examination of complainant                    the<\/p>\n
    doctor     found that there were two injuries on                             his<\/p>\n
    person         and<\/p>\n
                           those       were        shown     in     the     injury<\/p>\n
    certificate           (Exh.35).         The      evidence         of        PW     9<\/p>\n
    Sheshrao        Kadam        shows that he was on duty on                     the<\/p>\n
    said date in the school and he saw that one of the<\/p>\n
    accused        assaulted the complainant on his nose                             by<\/p>\n
    means     of     fist        blows and         thereafter        blood           was<\/p>\n
    oozing     from        nose of complainant.                His      evidence<\/p>\n
    supports        the     prosecution story that the                    accused<\/p>\n
    obstructed           them    in     discharging        their        official<\/p>\n
    duties.         The     evidence          of     these        witnesses           is<\/p>\n
    consistent with each other and the complaint.\n<\/p>\n
    .         The        evidence of head master also                   supports<\/p>\n
    the     prosecution          case      so far as assault               by        the<\/p>\n
    accused         persons           to       the     complainant.                   He<\/p>\n
                                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                               10<\/span><\/p>\n
    specifically          deposed        that blood was oozing                 from<\/p>\n
    nose     of     complainant.          Doctor’s evidence               further<\/p>\n
    shows         that        injury    no.2         which    is     shown         in<\/p>\n
    certificate Exh.35 is possible by fist blows.                                The<\/p>\n
    evidence        of        P.W.7    and P.W.9 also           supports         the<\/p>\n
    prosecution case.             The version of the witnesses is<\/p>\n
    corroborated by medical evidence.\n<\/p>\n
    13.       In my considered view, the defence taken by<\/p>\n
    the     accused persons that since accused no.1 and 2<\/p>\n
    are brother and father respectively of the student<\/p>\n
    Shukla     they<\/p>\n
                              have right to enter in the                premises<\/p>\n
    for enquiry purposes at the time of examination is<\/p>\n
    required        to be rejected.             There was no reason for<\/p>\n
    the     accused        persons       to     go    there        during        the<\/p>\n
    examination          hours.         The     manner        in     which       the<\/p>\n
    accused       persons entered the premises of the                          said<\/p>\n
    school and further entered in the examination hall<\/p>\n
    and     assaulted          P.W.6 Ambhore who was               supervising<\/p>\n
    hall no.5 and subsequently, when they were brought<\/p>\n
    to     office        of     head master,         they     assaulted          the<\/p>\n
    complainant,              does      indicate         that      they         have<\/p>\n
    committed        offence as alleged by the                   prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
    The     evidence          of the prosecution witnesses                   fully<\/p>\n
    corroborates          the        evidence      of P.Ws.6, 7           and      9,<\/p>\n
    which     is further supported by medical evidence of<\/p>\n
                                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n                                           11<\/span><\/p>\n
    P.W.8.\n<\/p>\n
    14.       It     cannot       be forgotten that not only                 the<\/p>\n
    accused        persons       have committed the offence                but,<\/p>\n
    they     have entered the place where examination was<\/p>\n
    being     conducted and assaulted the complainant                          as<\/p>\n
    well     as     P.W.6 Prakash Ambhore.           The act          of     the<\/p>\n
    student        to run away with the answer and                  question<\/p>\n
    papers,        calling       father and brother and in               turn,<\/p>\n
    the     arrival        of     the father and     brother          in     the<\/p>\n
    examination           hall    of   the     school      and        further<\/p>\n
    assaulting           the<\/p>\n
                                 complainant and P.W.6 Ambhore                 is<\/p>\n
    serious.        The entire atmosphere in the educational<\/p>\n
    institutions gets seriously affected and disturbed<\/p>\n
    because        of such incidents and, therefore, I am of<\/p>\n
    the      view         that     when      both   the    Courts          have<\/p>\n
    appreciated           the evidence and even on             independent<\/p>\n
    scrutiny        of     the evidence, I am also of the                  view<\/p>\n
    that     the     prosecution has fully           established             the<\/p>\n
    case     against the applicant – accused.                   No case is<\/p>\n
    made out for interference in the impugned judgment<\/p>\n
    and order.\n<\/p>\n
    15.       Hence, the criminal revision application is<\/p>\n
    rejected.        Rule is discharged.\n<\/p>\n
                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>
\n             12<\/span><\/p>\n
                 [ S.S. SHINDE ]
\n                      Judge.\n<\/p>\n
    PLK\/<\/p>\n
                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:22:55 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 Bench: S. S. Shinde 1 \/\/REPORTABLE\/\/ CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.59 OF 2009. Date of decision : 2nd MARCH, 2009. For approval and signature. THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE. 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers } may […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-209324","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nWhether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1872,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009"},"wordCount":1872,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009","name":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-22T22:08:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-reporters-of-local-papers-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether Reporters Of Local Papers … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/209324","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=209324"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/209324\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=209324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=209324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=209324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}