- (1.) This application and a number of other applications relate to a group of cases commonly described as "gherao" cases. The expression "gherao" is not entirely new, and already finds place in three Bengali dictionaries. But as will be presently described, it has now acquired a connotation and meaning which is entirely new. In its new garb it has acquired a semblance of enviable notoriety News of gheraos are now widely published in news-papers and are avidly read by the public Like many other words it may soon be considered as a contribution of West Bengal to semantics and I have no doubt that it will presently appear in all standard dictionaries in the English language The origin of the word "gherao" is not easy to ascertain. As I have already mentioned the word occurs in three Bengali dictionaries. In the dictionary compiled by Jnanendra Mohan Das, the word "gherao" is stated to have been derived from the Hindi word "ghirao" and means "covered or encircled". It is also mentioned that the word "gher" is derived from the Sanskrit word "ghri" which also means. -- "to cover or to encircle". The word "gherao" in this sense has also been mentioned in the "Chalantika" and in the "Biswakosh'', In the Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Dr. Monier Williams, Boden Professor of Sanskrit in the University of Oxford, the Sanskrit word "ghar" (gharayatiyitam) means "to cover". In Wilson's Glossary of Legal Terms, "gher" or "ghero" or "gherna" are Persian words which mean "to surround encircle fence or to bind a hedge.'' In Richardson's Persian Arabic Dictionary we come across the Persian word "gherra", which means "confinement not free" Having heard all the matters before us we have come to the conclusion that the word "gherao" may mean one of two things. Primarily, it means an "encirclement" in the sense of blockade. It may be a complete encirclement or a partial encirclement intended to blockade the egress and ingress from and to a particular office, workshop, factory or even residence. The second kind of gherao is an encirclement in depth that is to say a virtual occupation of the target to be "gheraoed" fan expression also in circulation by now) resulting in the prevention of ingress by the management or its staff Between these two meanings, there are a number of shades or nuances which will be described presently. After a few preliminary facts have been stated, a more precise definition will be attempted.
(2.) These applications under Article 226 of the Constitution were first of all moved before B. C. Mitra J. Subsequently, regard being had to the importance of the matter a larger Bench was constituted to hear them. In order to understand what they are about. I might briefly relate certain facts stated in the pleadings:
(3.) In the instant case, the allegations made in the petition are as follows: The petitioner No. 1 is a limited company, known as the Jay Engineering Works. Its principal business consists of the manufacture of Sewing machines and fans. It has a sales office known as the 'Eastern India Usha Corporation' at No. 26 R. N. Mukherjee Road in Calcutta The said office employs, apart from the management staff, approximately 365 workmen. The petitioner No. 1 Ram Nath Gupta is the manager of the said office the petitioner No 3 Anand Prakash Goel is the office superintendent, the petitioner No 4. Srikesh Lahiri is the Area Supervisor and the petitioner No. 5 Sudhir Kumar Mukherjee is also an Area Supervisor and the petitioners Nos. 6 and 7, Baijnath Kapur and Babulal Toshi are supervisors, in the said office The respondent No 8, the Jay Engineering Workers Union is registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The respondent No. 17 Raghunath Kushari is the executive member of the said union, while the respondents Nos. 9 to 16 and 18 to 28 are members of the said union. On or about 17th January, 1967, 18 employees of the sales office, including respondents No. 9 to 12 and 18 to 22 were retrenched. We are not concerned in this case with the legality of the retrenchment. On the 27th January 1967, at about 1 p.m. the retrenched employees along with 70 others, blockaded the said corporation's premises, completely obstructing the passage of personnel and goods, including food stuffs for the barricaded persons inside, who were wrongfully confined therein. The blockade was lifted at 3 A.M. on 28th January 1967 after police intervention, On the 1st March 1967, the present Government in West Bengal, came into office. On 2nd March, 1967 the retrenched workers, together with other employees numbering about 200 persons gheroed the manager (petitioner No. 2) and other officers at the office premises from 1 P.M., and the gherao continued for 33 hours, being lifted at 10 P.M. on 3rd March 1967. It is said that the said persons confined the manager, the petitioner No. 2 and the other officers, namely the petitioners Nos. 3 to 7, tampered with the company's property spoilt the walls and continuously shouted insulting and humiliating slogans against the confined persons. Supply of food to those confined was not permitted except for a nominal quantity at the will of the beseigers. Information was given to the police authorities at Hare Street Police Station, but no action was taken.;