The Crossbill Team
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the 1988 ban on Salman Rushdie's book The Satanic Verses by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
The decision follows the CBIC’s inability to produce the original notification of the ban, which was issued on October 5, 1988, and the admission that the document is “untraceable,” The Indian Express reported.
On November 5, the division bench of the court declared the petition "infructuous," noting that in the absence of the notification, it was compelled to "presume that no such notification exists."
The court also clarified that the petitioner, Sandipan Khan, would be "entitled to take all actions in respect of the said book as available in law."
Khan, a self-identified book lover, had filed the petition in 2019 after encountering difficulties importing The Satanic Verses due to its purported ban. Khan had been told by bookstores that the book was prohibited for sale in India and was not being published within the country.
He sought the court’s ruling to declare the CBIC’s 1988 notification unconstitutional, and requested permission to import the book from its publisher or international e-commerce platforms without violating the ban.
In his petition, Khan argued that the notification was neither available on the website of the authorities nor accessible to them. In November 2022, the authorities admitted that the notification could not be found, reported the newspaper.
The petition also named the Secretary of the Department of Revenue under the Ministry of Finance and the Home Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs as respondents.
Given the authorities' failure to produce the notification, the court said, "None of the respondents could produce the said notification dated 05.10.1988 with which the petitioner (Khan) is purportedly aggrieved and, in fact, the purported author of the said notification has also shown his helplessness in producing a copy of the said notification during the pendency of the present writ petition since its filing way back in 2019.”
The bench concluded that in these circumstances, it had no choice but to assume the non-existence of the notification, thereby rendering the petition moot.
The decision follows the CBIC’s inability to produce the original notification of the ban, which was issued on October 5, 1988, and the admission that the document is “untraceable,” The Indian Express reported.
On November 5, the division bench of the court declared the petition "infructuous," noting that in the absence of the notification, it was compelled to "presume that no such notification exists."
The court also clarified that the petitioner, Sandipan Khan, would be "entitled to take all actions in respect of the said book as available in law."
Khan, a self-identified book lover, had filed the petition in 2019 after encountering difficulties importing The Satanic Verses due to its purported ban. Khan had been told by bookstores that the book was prohibited for sale in India and was not being published within the country.
He sought the court’s ruling to declare the CBIC’s 1988 notification unconstitutional, and requested permission to import the book from its publisher or international e-commerce platforms without violating the ban.
In his petition, Khan argued that the notification was neither available on the website of the authorities nor accessible to them. In November 2022, the authorities admitted that the notification could not be found, reported the newspaper.
The petition also named the Secretary of the Department of Revenue under the Ministry of Finance and the Home Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs as respondents.
Given the authorities' failure to produce the notification, the court said, "None of the respondents could produce the said notification dated 05.10.1988 with which the petitioner (Khan) is purportedly aggrieved and, in fact, the purported author of the said notification has also shown his helplessness in producing a copy of the said notification during the pendency of the present writ petition since its filing way back in 2019.”
The bench concluded that in these circumstances, it had no choice but to assume the non-existence of the notification, thereby rendering the petition moot.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment