Today, On 20th January, The Supreme Court directed the Punjab Government not to take any coercive action against Punjab Kesari and allowed its Ludhiana printing press to resume operations while the dispute awaits a final judgment before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Supreme Court issued a directive instructing the State of Punjab not to take any coercive action against the publication of the Punjab Kesari newspaper.
The Court ensured that its printing press could operate without interruption while awaiting a judgment from the Punjab and Haryana High Court regarding the ongoing dispute.
This interim order was made by the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi, following an urgent oral request from Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who represented the newspaper’s management.
Also Read: Supreme Court Rebukes Punjab Government for Failing to Implement 1996 Pension Scheme
The Court specified that this interim protection would remain in effect until the High Court delivers its judgment on the petition from the newspaper management and for an additional week afterward, allowing the parties to pursue appellate options if necessary.
Rohatgi described the situation as an extraordinary matter, noting that a series of punitive measures were taken by the State shortly after Punjab Kesari published critical articles about the Punjab government.
He detailed actions including disconnection of electricity, notices from the Pollution Control Board, the closure of hotels owned by the newspaper’s proprietors, the filing of FIRs, and attempts to shut down the printing press within just two days.
He argued that the press, which had been operational for nearly twenty years, was abruptly ordered to cease production based on water pollution allegations.
Rohatgi pointed out that although the Punjab and Haryana High Court had reserved judgment on the newspaper owners’ petition the previous day, no interim relief had been granted, leading them to file a Special Leave Petition with the Supreme Court.
Urging for prompt judicial intervention, he contended,
“Press cannot be stopped because you have published some articles,”
Countering the plea, Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the Punjab government, maintained that all actions taken were in strict compliance with the law, particularly regarding pollution control regulations. He informed the Court that the High Court had already reserved its judgment and that a ruling was anticipated soon.
He asserted,
“The matter can wait. Whatever action was needed has already been taken; we are not going to take further action,”
In response to the State’s arguments, CJI Surya Kant remarked,
“It is alright. Newspaper cannot be stopped.”
When Farasat clarified that only one unit was ordered to close due to pollution concerns and not the entire newspaper operation, the CJI noted that while the closure of hotels or other businesses could be assessed separately, the newspaper itself must remain operational.
The CJI stated,
“Don’t close the newspaper part,”
Rohatgi dismissed claims that liquor bottles had been found at the press, arguing that the discovery of two bottles did not warrant shutting down a newspaper.
The Bench formally recorded its directive, ruling that, without prejudice to the rights and positions of both parties and without commenting on the merits of the case, the printing press of Punjab Kesari should continue to function uninterruptedly.
Regarding other commercial entities owned by the management, including hotels, the Court called for the maintenance of the status quo.
This interim arrangement will be in effect until the High Court issues its judgment, along with one additional week thereafter, as stated by the Court.