http://ads2book.co/newspapers/14/MiD-DAY.aspx

MiD DAY MiD DAY is an afternoon compact newspaper in India with editions in Mumbai (Bombay), Bangalore, Delhi and Pune (launched on August 18, 2008). It was established in 1979 as in a family owned newspaper in Mumbai. MiD DAY is owned by Mid Day Infomedia Limited, a subsidiary of Mid Day Multimedia Limited, a publishing house listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange. Presently, it publishes newspapers in three languages: English, Gujarati and an Urdu newspaper called The Inquilab. The Inquilab, was the first paper of the group in Urdu, was born in the fervour of idealistic nationalism in 1938. MiD DAY was launched in 1979, in English. The special Sunday edition of it, the Sunday MiD DAY, began in 1981. The Mumbai newspaper publishes two editions: An early morning and a noon edition. Its slogan is, Make Work Fun. However, since April, 2009, only noon editions have been published and the company has dropped printing a morning newspaper, citing positioning issues. On September 20, 2007, four journalists of MiD DAY, including Resident Editor, Vitusha Oberoi and City Editor MK Tayal were sentenced to four months jail on contempt of court charges[1], because of a report they had filed on the ex-Chief Justice of India, Y. K. Sabharwal. Whether the charges in the report were true or not was not considered in arriving at the decision. Many in the legal community feel that in the 2006 Delhi sealing drive, Justice Sabharwal may have had a conflict of interest since his sons own a firm with relations to the Delhi real estate. Former Solicitor General KK Sud had called this behaviour "the height of indiscretion."[2]. The High Court, however, sentenced the journalists without considering the veracity of the reports, and this has led to considerable hue and cry[3]. Ex-law minister Shanti Bhushan stated that the Parliament had in 2006 amended the Contempt of Courts Act to say that "if the allegations against a judge were found to be true, then they would not be considered contemptuous". In view of this, the judgement, he said, may be "only aimed at terrifying the media and an attempt to curb truthfulness.