The Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court on Monday said the Maharashtra government should not make general and sweeping statements, that distribution of newspapers increases the chance of COVID-19 infection spreading, without referring to opinion of health experts.
Justice P B Varale was hearing a petition taken up suo moto (on its own) on the state government prohibiting door-to-door delivery of newspapers in view of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The government later amended its order by which the blanket ban on door-to-door delivery of newspapers was lifted and the same was restricted only to Mumbai, Pune and in containment zones in other districts.
Government pleader D R Kale on Monday submitted the government's affidavit which stated that the COVID-19 virus can stay on various surfaces for a considerable amount of time and a newspaper is something that will be passed on, hand to hand, by various people which can increases the chances of infection spreading.
Justice Varale, however, noted that the court failed to understand the logic behind the statement made in the affidavit.
"It seems that this is only a general and sweeping statement made in affidavit in reply. There is no reference to any comment of the experts in the field or any opinion formed by anybody working in the health area," the court said in its order.
"On the contrary, statements of certain experts published in the newspapers are to the effect that there is no need to carry an impression that the newspaper is a medium for spreading of coronavirus," it added.
Justice Varale further observed that in the lockdown period readership of newspapers has increased as public is interested to know latest updates along with detailed information which will only be available in newspapers.
The court was informed by amicus curiae (appointed to assist the court) Satyajit Bora that the Madras High Court had recently dismissed a petition seeking ban on door-to-door delivery of newspapers in Chennai.
Bora sought to submit a copy of the order. The court accepted the request and also directed the government pleader to file additional affidavit in response and posted the matter for further hearing on June 11.
Comments
0 comment