STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. DR. R. B. CHOWDHARY & 2 ORS

The first argument is correct. No doubt under the Code of Criminal Procedure the statement of an accused may be taken into consideration in an inquiry or trial but it is not strictly evi dence in the case. An accused, when he makes his statement under S. 342, does not depose as a witness because no oath is administered to 'him, when he is examined under that section. The recent amendment of the Code, however, enables an accused to give evidence on his own behalf under S. 342-A and to give evi this is only when an accused offers in writing dence on his own behalf that his statement can be read as evidence proper. However, the matter is not .to be decided on whether statement of Madane could be read as evidence or not but who Section 7 of the Press and was the ·editor of the newspaper. Registration of Books Act allows a presumption to be raised That section reads as follows:- under certain circumstances. "7. In any · legal proceeding whatever, as well civil as criminal, the production of a copy of such declaration as is aforesaid, attested by the seal of some Court empowered by this Act to have the custody of such declaration (or, in the case of the editor, a copy of it as the newspaper containing his name printed on that of the editor) shall be held (unless .the contrary be proved) to be sufficient evidence, as against the per son whose name shall be subscribed to such declara tion, (or printed on such newspaper, as the case may be) that the said person was printer or publisher, or printer and publisher (according as the words of the said declaration may be) of every portion of every (newspaper) whereof the title shall correspond with the title of the (newspaper) mentioned in the declara tion (or the editor of every portion of that issue of the newspaper of which a copy is produced.) The term 'editor' is defined in the Act to mean a person who controls the selection of the matter that is published in a news paper. Where there is mentioned an ~itor as a. person who is responsible for selection of the matenal s. 1 raises the pre sumption in respect of such a person. The name of that. person has to be printed on the copy of the newspaper and m A B c D E F G H l MAHARASHTRo\ v. CHOWDHARY (Hldayatullah, /.) 711 A B c present case the name of Madane admittedly was printed as the Editor of the Maharashtra in the copy of the Maharashtra which contained the defamatory article. The declaration in Form I which has been. produced before us shows the name of Madane In not only as the printer and publisher but also as the editor. our opinion the presumption will attach to Madane as having It may selected the material for publication in the newspaper. not be out of place to note that Madane admitted that he had written this article. In the circumstances. not only the presump tion cannot be drawn against the others who had not declared themselves as editors of the newspaper but it is also fair to leave them out because they had no concern with the publishing of the artiCle in question. On the whole therefore the order of dis charge made by the learned Single Judge appears to be proper in the circumstances of the case and we see no reason to inter fere. The appeal fails and iq dismissed. V.P.S. Appeal dismirsed- ' ;