SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. - (1.) The applicant, an Advocate by profession, in the instant application seeks to set aside the declaration made about a pamphlet referred at item 15 in the notification issued by State of Rajasthan under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") published in Rajasthan Rajpatra dated April 22, 1993.
(2.) Section 95 of Cr. P.C. enables the State Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, after stating grounds for its opinion, if any newspaper, book or document contains :- (i) any seditious matter punishable under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), or (ii) any matter promoting enmity between different classes or at places of worship, punishable under Section 153-B, IPC, or (iii) any matter containing obsence books or obscene objects, punishable under Section 292 or 293, IPC, or (iv) any matter which amounts to maliciously insulting the religion or religious beliefs of any class punishable under Section 295-A IPC, to declare every copy thereof forfeited to the State Government. Thereupon any police officer may seize such newspaper, book or document wherever found in India. Any Magistrate is also authorised to issue a search warrant for its seizure.
(3.) Under Section 96(1), Cr. P.C., any person having any interest in such publication may apply to the High Court to set aside such order on the ground that it did not contain such matter as is referred to iri Section 95. In order to determine whether a particular document falls within the ambit of section 95, the writing has to be considered as a whole in a fair and liberal spirit without dwelling too much upon isolated passage or upon a strong word here and there. An endeavour should be made to gather the general effect that the whole composition would have on the mind of the public. A common sense interpretation must be given to the document complained of and the question to be answered always being what impression will the document or words have on a man of ordinary common sense (vide State of Bihar v. Shailabala Devi AIR 1952 SC 329 : (1952 Cri LJ 1373). In Harnam Das v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1662 : (1961(2J Cri LJ 815) it was indicated that when an application is made under Section 96 to have an order of forfeiture set aside on the ground that the matter published does not fall within the mischief of Section 153-A or 295-A, IPC, it is for the party to show that the order was improper.;