New Delhi, Jan. 21 -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained the Punjab government from taking any coercive action that could disrupt the publication of the Punjab Kesari newspaper in the state, after the media group alleged that it was being selectively targeted by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led state government over unfavourable reportage. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, passed the interim order after an urgent mentioning by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Punjab Kesari Group. "Without prejudice to the rights of the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is directed that the printing press shall continue to operate uninterruptedly, while the commercial units can remain shut for the time being," the bench ordered. The interim protection will remain in force until the Punjab and Haryana High Court pronounces its order in the matter and for seven days thereafter, to enable the aggrieved parties to approach the appellate court, the bench said. Rohatgi told the court that the group's printing press had been partially shut after electricity was disconnected and that two hotels run by the group were also closed following regulatory action, which he described as a direct fallout of an adverse news report published against the ruling dispensation. "This is an attack on the freedom of the press. They have cut the electricity of my printing press and shut two hotels that we run because of an adverse article about the present dispensation," argued Rohatgi, adding that halting newspaper publication was impermissible in a democracy. He informed the bench that the Punjab and Haryana High Court had heard the matter at length on Monday and reserved its order, but had declined to grant interim relief, prompting the newspaper to urgently approach the Supreme Court to prevent disruption of publication. "The newspaper cannot be stopped from printing," Rohatgi emphasised. Responding to the submissions, senior advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the Punjab government, maintained that only one unit of the printing press had been affected due to alleged pollution violations and that the entire operation had not been shut. However, the bench repeatedly questioned the justification for any action that impacted newspaper publication. "Hotel is fine, but why the newspaper should be shut?" the CJI asked. When told that only one unit was closed, the bench responded: "Do not close down the newspaper. Hotels can remain shut, but why the newspaper should be?"...