The Supreme Court on Tuesday intervened in a dispute involving the Punjab Kesari newspaper group and the Punjab government, directing that one of the group’s printing presses should not be closed for the time being. The press had been ordered shut by the State Pollution Control Board, prompting the media group to approach the apex court seeking urgent relief.
The matter was mentioned before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Punjab Kesari group, argued that the closure order was arbitrary and appeared to be linked to the newspaper’s recent publication of reports critical of the state government. He requested an immediate stay on the closure of the printing press as well as a hotel operated by the same group.
Rohatgi contended that the actions taken by the state authorities raised concerns related to press freedom and alleged misuse of regulatory powers. He said the sudden closure of the press would severely affect the functioning of the newspaper and impact the livelihood of employees associated with the establishment.
Representing the Punjab government, Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi and Additional Advocate General Shadan Farasat opposed the plea. They submitted that the closure was carried out strictly in accordance with environmental laws. According to the state, liquor bottles were found within the printing press premises, which was cited as a violation of regulations. The government also argued that the hotel run by the group had breached pollution control norms.
The bench took note of the submissions made by both sides and observed that the issues raised required detailed examination. The Supreme Court directed that the printing press should be allowed to continue operations for the time being and issued notice to the Punjab government seeking its response.
The court’s interim order has been viewed as significant, particularly in the context of concerns over freedom of the press and the use of regulatory authorities against media organisations. Legal experts note that while environmental compliance is essential, any action affecting media operations must be proportionate and transparent.
The case is expected to be heard in detail at a later date, during which the Supreme Court will examine whether due process was followed by the pollution control board and whether the closure order was justified under the law.
Until further orders, Punjab Kesari will be allowed to continue printing operations at the affected press. The final outcome of the case could have broader implications for the relationship between regulatory authorities and media organisations across the country.
