Supreme Court Grants Interim Relief To 'Punjab Kesari' Newspaper, Halts State Action Against Printing Press For Alleged Environmental Violations
The Court directed that the newspaper's printing press must be allowed to function uninterruptedly, effectively barring the state from enforcing a closure order against the media house’s core operations.
The Supreme Court, today, directed the State of Punjab to refrain from taking any coercive measures against the publication of the Punjab Kesari newspaper.
This protection comes as the management awaits a judgment from the Punjab and Haryana High Court regarding the legality of the State’s recent actions against the media house.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi made an urgent oral mentioning before the bench, seeking immediate relief after the Punjab and Haryana High Court had reserved its judgment yesterday, but declined to grant interim protection against the forced closure of the publication’s printing press and an associated hotel.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi ordered, "Owing to the nature of the relief prayed for, the subject Special Leave Petition is taken on board, subject to the clearing of the defects, if any....It is directed that the printing press, re-publication of the newspaper Punjab Kesari, shall continuously function uninterruptedly. However, in the other commercial establishments, including a hotel, the status quo shall be maintained. This interim arrangement is made till the pronouncement of the judgment by the High Court for one week more to enable the aforesaid party to approach the appropriate forum."
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the Petitioner, Additional Advocate General Sadan Parashar, and Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi appeared for the State of Punjab & Haryana.
The Court also ordered, "On the oral mentioning by Sri Mukul Rohatgi, Ld. Senior Counsel, representing the Petitioner...has filed a special leave petition today in the morning, and the matter being of extraordinary urgent in nature, he submits that the same may be listed during the course of day. It is pointed out that as a result of the coercive action taken by the Punjab State Pollution Control Board, the hotel being run by the petitioner management, along with its newspaper, Punjab Kesari, which has been published for decades, has also been partially closed down...The only limited prayer made before this Court is that till the pronouncement of the judgment by the High Court, some interim protection may be granted to the Petitioners."
The petitioner argued that the closure was a targeted action by the state dispensation following the publication of a critical article. While the State submitted that the units were being shut down for violations of the Pollution Control Act—alleging that "liquor bottles" were even found on the press premises—the Petitioner said that such minor issues should not result in the silencing of a century-old news institution.
Rohatgi emphasized that while a hotel is a commercial entity that can afford to remain closed for a few days, the disconnection of a printing press would lead to a total disruption of the daily newspaper.
Representing the State of Punjab, Advocate General countered that the actions were taken "exactly according to the book" following clear violations of environmental laws. He argued that the matter had already been heard in detail by the High Court and that the Supreme Court should not interfere while the lower court’s judgment was still pending.
The Supreme Court, acknowledging the "extraordinary urgent nature" of the petition, ordered to balance the interests of both sides without expressing an opinion on the merits of the pollution case. The Court directed that the printing press responsible for the publication of Punjab Kesari shall continue to function uninterruptedly. This protection ensures that the newspaper can continue its operations while the legal proceedings continue.
Regarding the other commercial establishments involved, including the hotel, the Court ordered that the status quo be maintained. This interim arrangement is set to remain in place until the High Court pronounces its formal judgment and for an additional four days thereafter. This window was specifically granted to allow the affected parties sufficient time to approach the appropriate legal forum once the High Court's final decision is released.