FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

Special Assignment Report on

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN

PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

Special Assignment Submitted to:

Mr. Vishal Dixit
(Faculty, Media Law)

Special Assignment Project Submitted By:

Devvrat Vaishnav, Roll No. 58, Section- A

SEMESTER- X

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Uparwara Post, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur – 492002 (C.G.)

I
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to the Almighty who gave me the strength to complete this project with sheer hard

work and honesty. This research venture has been made possible due to the generous co-operation

of various persons. To list them all is not practicable, even to repay them in words is beyond the

domain of my lexicon.

This project wouldn’t have been possible without the help of my teacher Mr. Vishal Dixit,

Faculty, Media Law at HNLU, who had always been there at my side whenever I needed some

help regarding any information. He has been my mentor in the truest sense of the term. The

administration has also been kind enough to let me use their facilities for research work.

HNLU, Raipur

II
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

DECLARATION

I, Devvrat Vaishnav m hereby declare that, the project work entitled” freedom of speech and
expression in present day India” : a critical analysis ” submitted to Hidayatullah National Law
University, Raipur is record of an original work done by me under the able guidance of Mr.
Vishal Dixit, Faculty Member, H.N.L.U., Raipur.

DEVVRAT VAISHNAV

Batch - XV

SEM –X

ROLLNO-58

III
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ................................................................................................ 1
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................................. 2
RESEARCH QUESTIONS............................................................................................................... 2
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 2
SCOPE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................. 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ........................................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER-2: HISTORICAL ORIGIN AND EMERGENCE AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT ............... 4
HISTORICAL ORIGIN .................................................................................................................... 4

PURPOSE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION ...................................................... 5

FREEDOM OF SILENCE- NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE ............................................................ 5
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY PROTEST AND CASE OF KANHAIYA KUMAR .... 6
CHAPTER – 3: CASE STUDY ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION ................................ 7
HAMDARD DAWAKHANA V. UNION OF INDIA ..................................................................... 7
PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES(PUCL) V. UNION OF INDIA ............................... 7
INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS V. UNION OF INDIA .......................................................... 7
ABBAS V. UNION OF INDIA ........................................................................................................ 8
BENNET COLEMAN AND CO. V. UNION OF INDIA ................................................................ 8
CHAPTER – 4 ARNAB GOSWAMI CASE ................................................................................................ 9
BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................. 9
SUBMISSIONS .............................................................................................................................. 10
JOURNALISTIC FREEDOM ........................................................................................................ 10
TRANSFER OF INVESTIGATION TO CBI ................................................................................ 11
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................... 12
SUGGESTION ........................................................................................................................................... 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 14
 BOOKS, ARTICLES AND JOURNALS .................................................................................. 14
 WEBSITES ................................................................................................................................ 14

IV
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The freedom of speech is regarded as the first condition of liberty. It occupies a preferred and
important position in the hierarchy of the liberty, it is truly said about the freedom of speech that
it is the mother of all other liberties. In modern time it is widely accepted that the right to freedom
of speech is the essence of free society and it must be safeguarded at all time. The first principle
of a free society is an untrammeled flow of words in an open forum. Liberty to express opinions
and ideas without hindrance, and especially without fear of punishment plays significant role in
the development of that particular society and ultimately for that state. It is one of the most
important fundamental liberties guaranteed against state suppression or regulation. Freedom of
speech is guaranteed not only by the constitution or statutes of various states but also by various
international conventions like Universal Declaration of Human Rights, European convention on
Human Rights and fundamental freedoms, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
etc. These declarations expressly talk about protection of freedom of speech and expression.

 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The project deals with the question that how the Freedom to speech and Expression a Fundamental
right in Indian1 Constitution and also a basic human right under Art 19 of universal human right
declaration is functioning in the country in 2020.Information and its expression is seen as an
essential part of communication for any human being. Media, especially the Print Media, has all
along been the backbone of all mass movements or popular upsurge, and Indian independence
struggle is no exception. Right from the time of India's First War of Independence in 1857,
Hindi/Urdu journals like Payam-e-Azadi and Samachar Sudhavarshan supported the struggle for
freedom, and exhorted people to throw out the British rulers. This provoked the British to hit back
with the notorious Vernacular Press Act, popularly known as the Gagging Act, imposing many
restrictions on the newspapers and periodicals of the day.

1
Art 19 of the Indian Constitution.

Page | 1
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1. To compare and evaluate the difference regarding freedom and restriction of media.
2. To know, about the freedom of speech and expression in India, with the help or
relevant case laws and recent trends.

 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What is freedom of speech and expression in India?
2. To what extent can freedom of speech & expression by media be allowed?

 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This project is a Doctrinal research includes studying books and established literature and not
actually going to the field and doing empirical research. Source of research work: The sources of
this project are both primary (bare acts, statutes, etc) and secondary sources (books given by
different authors, journals, internet, etc). This Research Project is descriptive and analytical in
nature.

 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The current projects scope is confined to the study of freedom of speech and expression in India
specifically focuses on this aspect of recent cases in 2020 in the country.

 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1. PUCL BULLETIN. PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES. JULY 1982. -It has
been frequently alleged, especially in India, that the freedom of the Press is in danger
because of the ownership of the newspaper industry and the predominance of some
newspaper groups and chains. It is also suggested that the editors and journalists cannot
have adequate freedom of collecting and disseminating facts and offering comments as
they are under the pressure of the capitalist owners. It is further pointed out that free
collection and dissemination of facts is not possible in the case of newspapers which
depend to a large extent on revenue from advertisements as the advertising interests
cannot but influence the presentation of news and comments. Unless this whole structure
of ownership and control in the newspaper industry, and also the manner of the economic
management of the Press, is changed, it is therefore suggested, the Press cannot be really
free.

Page | 2
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

2. AUSTIN, GRANVILLE (1999). WORKING A DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION: THE

INDIAN EXPERIENCE. OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS. -This important book offers
critical insights into four decades of the Indian Constitution. It charts the course of
constitutional reform in India from the euphoric idealism of the post-independence period,
through the crisis years of emergency, and up to Rajiv Gandhi's brief stay in power. The
book analyzes the ways in which various legal and political vicissitudes of democracy have
affected the making of the Indian Constitution.
3. JAISING, INDIRA. "HOW THE GOVERNMENT IS USING POWERS IT DOESN'T
HAVE TO CURB FREEDOM OF SPEECH - THE WIRE-The show-cause notice
issued by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry on August 7 to three channels
threatening “action” against them for having allegedly disrespected the judiciary and
the President of India by their coverage of Yakub Memon’s execution has been rightly
criticized for the implications it has for freedom of speech and expression in the
country.

Page | 3
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CHAPTER-2: HISTORICAL ORIGIN AND EMERGENCE AS A

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
“IF LIBERTY MEANS ANYTHING AT ALL, IT MEANS THE RIGHT TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT
THEY DO NOT WANT TO HEAR”- GEORGE ORWELL”

Freedom of speech and expression is one of the six fundamental rights conferred to the citizens of
India under Part III of the Constitution. It is one of the most important aspects in the hierarchy of
personal liberties provided under Article 19 to Article 22 of the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)
(a) states that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. But this right
is subject to limitations imposed under Article 19(2) which empowers the State to put ‘reasonable’
restriction on various grounds, namely, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States,
public order, decency and morality, contempt of court, defamation3, incitement of offence4, and
integrity and sovereignty of India.

 HISTORICAL ORIGIN

The law in the current form finds its root in the Hate Speech Law Section 2952(A), of Indian Penal
Code, enacted by the British Administration in India. This act was brought about in the backdrop
of a series of murders of Arya Samaj leaders who polemicized against Islam. This started in 1897
with the murder of Pandit Lekhram by a Muslim because he had written a book criticizing Islam3.
Koenraad Elst argues that "Section 295A was not instituted by Hindu society, but against it. It was
imposed by the British on the Hindus in order to shield Islam from criticism". The murder series
caught lime-light in December, 1926 after the murder of Swami Shraddhananda for the protection
he gave to a family of converts from Islam to Hinduism in addition to writing Hindu Sangathan,
Saviour of the Dying Race in 19264.Precedence to this law started even before this as in a case
against Arya Samaj preacher Dharm Bir in 1915, ten Muslims were sentenced for rioting, but
Dharm Bir was also charged under section 2985 of Indian Penal Code, for "using offensive phrases

2
Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or
religious beliefs :Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of
146[citizens of India], 147[by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or
otherwise], insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 148[three years], or with fine, or with both.
3
Chopra, Chandmal, and Sita Ram Goel. 1987. The Calcutta Quran Petition. New Delhi: Voice of India.
4
Sraddhananda (1926-01-01). Hindu sangathan: saviour of the dying race. Delhi: Shraddhananda.
5
Uttering, words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person-

Page | 4
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

and gestureswith the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings" of another
community; and under Section 153(A) 6of Indian Penal Code , for "wantonly provoking the riot
which subsequently occurred" and "a judge was brought in who could assure conviction"7

 PURPOSE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

Freedom of speech and expression not only allows people to communicate their feelings, ideas,
and opinions to others, rather it serves a broader purpose as well. These purposes can be classified
into four:

 It helps an individual to attain self- fulfilment;

 It assists in the discovery of truth;
 It strengthens the capacity of an individual to participate in the decision making process;
 It provides a mechanism by which it would be possible to establish a reasonable balance
between stability and social change.

Freedom of speech and expression of the press lays at the foundation of all democratic
organizations, for without free political discussion no public education, so essential for the proper
functioning of the popular government is possible.5

 FREEDOM OF SILENCE- NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE

Freedom of speech also includes the right to silence. In Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala8, three
children belonging to Jehovah’s witnesses were expelled from the school for refusing to sing the
national anthem, although they stood respectfully when the same was being sung. They challenged
the validity of their expulsion before the Kerala High Court which upheld the expulsion as valid
and on the ground that it was their fundamental duty to sing the national anthem. On appeal, the

Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes
any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places, any object in the
sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one
year, or with fine, or with both.
6
Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc.,
and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.
7
Adcock, C.S. (2016). "Violence, passion, and the law: a brief history of section 295A and its antecedents". Journal
of the American Academy of Religion. 84.
8
1986 3 SC 615

Page | 5
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

Supreme Court held that the students did not commit any offence under the Prevention of Insults
to National Honour Act, 1971. Also, there was no law under which their fundamental right under
Article 19(1) (a) could be curtailed. Accordingly, it was held that the children’s expulsion from
the school was a violation of their fundamental right under Article 19(1) (a), which also includes
the freedom of silence.

 JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY PROTEST AND CASE OF KANHAIYA

KUMAR

The offence of sedition, in India, is defined under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code as,
“whoever by words either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation or
otherwise brings into hatred or contempt or excite or attempts to excite disaffection towards the
government established by law in India shall be punished”. In the recent case of Kanhaiya
Kumar v. State of Nct of Delhi9, students of Jawaharlal Nehru University organized an event on
the Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, who was hanged in 2013. The event was a protest
through poetry, art, and music against the judicial killing of Afzal Guru. Allegations were made
that the students in the protest were heard shouting anti-Indian slogans. A case therefore filed
against several students on charges of offence under Sections [124-A, 120-B, and 34]8. The
University’s Students Union president Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested after allegations of ‘anti-
national’ sloganeering were made against him. Kanhaiya Kumar was released on bail by the
Delhi High Court as the police investigation was still at nascent stage, and Kumar’s exact role in
the protest was not clear.

9
P. (CRL)558/2016

Page | 6
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CHAPTER – 3: CASE STUDY ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND

EXPRESSION
 Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India10

The validity of the Drug and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act, which put
restrictions on advertisement of drugs in certain cases and prohibited advertisements of drugs
having magic qualities for curing diseases was challenged on the ground that the restriction on
advertisement abridged the freedom. The Supreme Court held that an advertisement is no doubt a
form of speech but every advertisement was held to be dealing with commerce or trade and not for
propagating ideas. Advertisement of prohibited drugs would, therefore, not fall within the scope
of Article 19(1) (a).

 People’s Union for Civil Liberties(PUCL) v. Union of India11

In this case, public interest litigation (PIL) 11 was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution
by PUCL, against the frequent cases of telephone tapping. The validity of Section 5(2)13 of The
Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 was challenged. It was observed that “occurrence of public
emergency” and “in the interest of public safety” is the sine qua non14 for the application of the
provisions of Section 5(2). If any of these two conditions are not present, the government has no
right to exercise its power under the said section. Telephone tapping, therefore, violates Article
19(1) (a) unless it comes within the grounds of reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).

 Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India12

The Court, in this case, observed that, Article 19 of the Indian Constitution does not use the phrase
“freedom of press”16 in its language, but it is contained within Article 19(1) (a). There cannot be
any interference with the freedom of press in the name of public interest. The purpose of the press
is to enhance public interest by publishing facts and opinions, without which a democratic
electorate cannot take responsible decisions.It is, therefore, the primary duty of courts to uphold
the freedom of press and invalidate all laws or administrative actions which interfere with it
contrary to the constitutional mandate. Similarly, imposition of pre-censorship of a journal, or

10
AIR 1960 SC 554
11
AIR 1997 SC 568
12
1985 2 SCC 434

Page | 7
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

prohibiting a newspaper from publishing its own views about any burning issue is a restriction on
the liberty of the press.

 Abbas v. Union of India13

The case is one of the firsts in which the issue of prior censorship of films under Article 19(2)
came into consideration of the Supreme Court of India. Under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, films
are divided into two categories- ‘U’ films for unrestricted exhibition, and ‘A’ films that can be
shown to adults only. The petitioner’s film was refused the ‘U’ certificate, and he challenged the
validity of censorship as violative of his fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression.
He contended that no other form of speech and expression was subject to such prior restraint, and
therefore, he demanded equality of treatment with such forms. The Court, however, held that
motion pictures are able to stir emotions more deeply than any other form of art. Hence, pre-
censorship and classification of films between ‘U’ and ‘A’ was held to be valid and was justified
under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.

 Bennet Coleman and Co. v. Union of India14

In this case, the validity of the Newsprint Control Order was challenged. The Order fixed the
maximum number of pages which a newspaper could publish, and this was said to be violative of
Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian Constitution. The government raised the contention that fixing the
newsprint would help in the growth of small newspapers as well as prevent monopoly in the
trade. It also justified its order of reduction of page level on the ground that big dailies devote a
very high percentage of space to advertisements, and therefore, the cut in pages will not affect
them. The Court held the newsprint policy to be an unreasonable restriction, and observed that
the policy abridged the petitioner’s right of freedom of speech and expression. The Court also
held that the fixation of page limit will have a twofold effect- first, it will deprive the petitioners
of their economic viability, and second, it will restrict the freedom of expression as compulsorily
reducing the page limit will lead to reduction of circulation and area of coverage for news.

13
AIR 1971 SC 481
14
AIR 1973 SC 106

Page | 8
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CHAPTER – 4 ARNAB GOSWAMI CASE

 BACKGROUND

Following the broadcasts on Republic TV dated 16-4-2020 and on R Bharat dated 21-4-2020,
multiple FIR’s and criminal complaints were lodged against the petitioner Arnab Goswami,
Editor-in-Chief of Republic TV and the Managing Director of ARG Outlier Media Asianet News
Private Limited which owns and operates R Bharat.
The broadcasts were in regard to an incident that occurred in Palghar District of Maharashtra
wherein 3 persons including 2 sadhus were brutally killed by mob, allegedly in the presence of
police and forest guard personnel. In the said broadcasts, petitioner had raised issues with regard
to the tardy investigation of the incident. Petitioner claimed that the Indian National Congress
had after the said broadcast launched a “well-coordinated, widespread, vindictive and malicious
campaign” against him.
The said campaign by the INC was carried out through various news reports, tweets and multiple
complaints against the petitioner seeking investigation into offences alleged to have been
committed by him under Sections 153, 153-A, 153-B, 295-A, 500, 504, 506 and 120-B of the Penal
Code, 1860. Campaign on social media using the hashtag #ArrestAntiIndiaArnab was also
doing rounds.
To affirm his claim, the petitioner also stated that the FIRs and complaints were lodged in the State
where the Governments were formed owing allegiance to the INC.
Petitioner refused any propagation of communal views being broadcasted by him on the news
channel that gave rise to the numerous complaints. Asserting his fundamental right to the Freedom
of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India, the petitioner
approached the Court seeking protection.
Another petition was filed which was occasioned by registration of an FIR against the petitioner
on 2nd May 2020 wherein it was stated that the petitioner had on 29th April 2020 made certain
statements on his broadcast on R Bharat that “people belonging to Muslim religion are
responsible for COVID-19 spread.” Challenging the said FIR, the petitioner sought to invoke

Page | 9
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

the jurisdiction of Court for quashing the said FIR and directing that no cognizance should be taken
on any complaint or FIR on the same cause of action.15

 SUBMISSIONS

Senior Counsel Harish Salve, on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the petition
raises “wider issues” implicating the freedom of speech and expression of a journalist to air
view which fall with the protective ambit of Article 19(1)(a).
Further adding to his submission, Mr Salve also stated that this Court should necessarily lay
down safeguards which protect the democratic interest in fearless and independent journalism.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the investigation be handed over to CBI as the
conduct of police in the present case has been disturbing.
Senior Counsel Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, on behalf of the investigating agency of the
Maharashtra Police, submitted that:
 Facts of the present case clearly demonstrate that in the garb of an arc of protection, the
accused is attempting to browbeat the police;
 Interference in the course of an investigation is impermissible.
 Though the petitioner is entitled to the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a), their
exercise is subject to the limitations stipulated in Article 19(2).
 Transfer of an ongoing investigation to the CBI has been held to be an extraordinary
power which must be sparingly exercised in exceptional circumstances
Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal stated that in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 32, the
Supreme Court may well quash all the other FIRs and allow the investigation into the FIR which
has been transferred to the NM Joshi Marg Police Station in Mumbai to proceed in accordance
with law.

 JOURNALISTIC FREEDOM
“India’s freedoms will rest safe as long as journalists can speak truth to power without being
chilled by a threat of reprisal.

15
Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 462 , decided 19-05-2020.

Page | 10
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

The Court stated that “the exercise of journalistic freedom lies at the core of speech and
expression protected by Article 19(1) (a).” However, it was also stated that the right of
journalists under Article 19(1) (a) is no higher than the right of the citizen to seek and express.
“Free citizens cannot exist when the news media is chained to adhere to one position.”
Considering all the aspects, in the present case, the Court thought necessary to intervene to
protect the rights of the petitioner as a citizen and as a journalist to fair treatment and liberty to
conduct an independent portrayal of views.

 TRANSFER OF INVESTIGATION TO CBI

It was noted that the precedents of the Supreme Court emphasise that transferring of
investigation to CBI is an “extraordinary power” to be used “sparingly” and “in exceptional
circumstances”.
Further the Bench opined that one factor that courts may consider is that such transfer is
“imperative” to retain “public confidence in the impartial working of the State agencies”.
Reiterating the principle laid down in the decision of Romila Thapar v. Union of India, 16the
Court opined that accused does not have a say in the matter of appointment of investigating
agency. Reliance was placed on a number of Supreme Court’s earlier decisions.
The Court held that so long as the investigation does not violate any provision of law, the
investigation agency is vested with the discretion in directing the course of investigation, which
includes determining the nature of the questions and the manner of interrogation.
Having analysed all the aspects, the Court issued the directions as mentioned above17

16
(2018) 10 SCC 753
17
Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 462 , decided 19-05-2020.

Page | 11
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

CONCLUSION

As a part of Conclusion let us have a comparative study regarding media and right to freedom of
speech and expression in various scenarios and forums:
1. HISTORICAL ORIGIN AND EMERGENCE AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT-
The first principle of a free society is an untrammeled flow of words in an open forum.
Liberty to express opinions and ideas without hindrance, and especially without fear of
punishment plays significant role in the development of that particular society and
ultimately for that state. It is one of the most important fundamental liberties guaranteed
against state suppression or regulation
2. CASE STUDY ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION-
Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India states that, all citizens shall have the right to
freedom of speech and expressionThe philosophy behind this Article lies in the Preamble
of the Constitution, where a solemn resolve is made to secure to all its citizen, liberty of
thought and expression. The exercise of this right is, however, subject to reasonable
restrictions for certain purposes being imposed under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of
India.

3. ARNAB GOSWAMI CASE-

The Supreme Court quashed all but one first information report filed against Arnab
Goswami in connection with statements made during a news broadcast, implying
investigation will continue, even as it extended protection to the editor-in-chief of Republic
TV from any coercive action for another three weeks. While the right of a journalist to
exercise his freedom of speech and expression cannot be exempted from being made
answerable to the legal regime, the law cannot be used to stifle the right of the press through
multiple complaints, according to the judgment.

Page | 12
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

SUGGESTION
In the light of Post Covid world and Globalization. One has to understand the importance of lack
of knowledge and communication which brought forth this pandemic and the importance of
controlling media at a reasonable line of restriction where hate contents and other negative
influences can be controlled in the social media platforms. The media have the liberty to put news
in front of its viewers or say into your plate “a freshly prepared food” and the decision is rests to
the ultimate consumer or people of the society to make a wise decision to have it or not after
checking its health factor for your life i.e. credibility, authenticity and fairness without any
biasness.

Page | 13
 FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN PRESENT DAY INDIA: A CRTITICAL ANALYSIS

BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCES

BOOKS, ARTICLES AND JOURNALS

 Ratanlal & Dhirajlal‘s - THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, Lexis Nexis; Sixth
edition (18 July 2017).
 R.V.Kelkar , Publication – Eastern Book Company ,Sixth Edition- 2017 Author- K.N.
Chandrasekhar Pillai
 Art.18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); Arts. 14 and 15 of the
International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966.
 Cr.P.C, 1973
 Constitution of India-Part III Article 19 Fundamental Rights.

WEBSITES

 www.manupatrafast.in

 synergy.net/fair trial, judiciary and media/anvar_adv.aspx

 www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1759/Fair-Trial

Page | 14