Mumbai: Despite citing expert opinions that newspapers could be carriers of the novel coronavirus, the Maharashtra government failed to convince the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court to reconsider its decision to restrict door-to-door distribution of newspapers. The HC found no logic in the “general and sweeping” statements made by the government to back its decision of prohibiting the door-to-door distribution.
A bench of Justice Prasanna Varale was unimpressed with the submission made by the government on an affidavit filed in response to a suo motu public interest litigation taken up by the court. The PIL was taken up after the government imposed a blanket ban on newspaper distribution.
In an earlier hearing, Justice Varale had pulled up the government, saying there was “no logic” in prohibiting door-to-door distribution but to allow the sale of papers at shops.
Pursuant to the last hearing, the government amended its decision and issued a fresh circular, by which it maintained the restrictions only in Mumbai, Pune and the containment zones in various districts.
To justify its decision, the government, through its counsel, filed an affidavit before Justice Varale stating, “According to experts, COVID-19 virus can stay on various surfaces for a considerable amount of time. The newspaper is something that will be passed on hand-to-hand by various people, which can increase the chances of infection spreading to more number of people.”
However, this statement did not go down well with the court, which said that there was no logical reasoning or data to back the contention.
“It seems that this is only a general and sweeping statement, as there is no reference to any comment of the experts in the field or any opinion formed by any body working in the health area,” Justice Varale noted.
“On the contrary, the 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,” Justice Varale added.
The bench further pointed out that in the earlier hearing itself, it had clarified that the government could continue to restrict door-to-door distribution in areas which are worst-hit or hotspots or containment zones.
“But no reason or any data is coming forth to provide a logical explanation to the decision whereby blanket ban was imposed on door-to-door delivery,” the judge observed.
The court further took into consideration the news items published in some newspapers that readership and the average time spent on reading a newspaper had increased during the lockdown period.
“In the backdrop of these facts, one fails to understand the logic behind the statement that the newspaper is something that will be passed on by hand-to-hand by various people which can increase the chances of infection spreading to more people,” Justice Varale held while posting the matter for further hearing in June.
