5. Mr. EDMUND HARVEY
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India in how many cases appeals have been brought in Courts of Law against orders of forfeiture made by the Executive Government under the Press Act, and whether any of these appeals have yet been successful?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY Of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Charles Roberts)
So far as the Secretary of State is aware, there have been five such appeals, all of which were unsuccessful.
6. Mr. E. HARVEY
asked the Under-Secretary for India whether he will give particulars of the case brought by the owners of the Rifah-i-Am steam press, Lahore, appealing against an order of forfeiture made under the Indian Press Act of 1910; whether he is aware that the appeal was dismissed on technical grounds as being barred by time, and that this was a result that even the lawyers who advised the applicants had not been able to anticipate; whether the loyalty and honesty of purpose of this newspaper was admitted by the Governor of the Punjab; and whether, in view of the circumstances of this ease, the Secretary of State will advise that some relief should be granted?
§ Mr. ROBERTS
The case referred to was one in which the printing Press made an application under Section 17 of the Press Act to set aside an order of forfeiture under Section 4. The Chief Court of the Punjab, which heard the application, rejected it on the ground that it was time-barred under Section 17, which requires that such application must be made within two months from the date of the order of forfeiture. The terms of that section are explicit, and admit only of the interpretation put upon them by the Chief Court. The Secretary of State has no information with regard to the third part of the question, and is not disposed to interfere with the discretion of the Local Government.