Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Freedom of The Press
Freedom of The Press
Table of Contents
Introduction
o What is Freedom of Press?
o Why Freedom of the Press?
Article 19 and Freedom of Press
o Scope of Freedom of Press under Article 19(1)(a)
Freedom to spread information
Freedom to criticize
Freedom to receive the information
Freedom to conduct interview
Freedom to report court proceedings
Freedom to attend and report legislative proceedings
Freedom to act as an advertising platform
Freedom to broadcast
Reasonable Limitations of Press’ Freedom
o Sovereignty and integrity of the state
o Security of the state
o Public Order
o Decency or morality
o Contempt of Court
o Defamation
o Friendly relations with Foreign states.
o Incitement to an offence
Conclusion
1.Introduction
In the world’s largest democracy, the freedom of speech and expression is the most crucial
fundamental right availed to the citizens by the constitution. The media is considered as the
fourth pillar of democracy and it plays a vital role in a country’s social, political, economical
and international affairs. Thus, it goes without saying that free press is a sine qua non for a
democracy to survive and thrive and preserve the ethos of good and transparent
governance.
In the past, India has witnessed the rise of political parties (Modi government), falling of the
governments (Rajiv Gandhi’s government), crashing of the economy(2008 crisis) and stock
markets getting skyrocketed (bullish Indian stock market after US-China Trade war), all
based on the information broadcasted regarding them by the media. A country’s
international reputation and the global impression are largely influenced by the kind of
news which prevails about that particular country in the international press.
Page 1 of 8
1.1. What is Freedom of Press?
Freedom of the press refers to the minimal interference of the state in the operation of
press on any form of communication including, print (newspapers, magazines, journals,
reports); audio (radios, podcasts); video (news channels, OTT platforms like YouTube) and
over other electronic mediums like news apps, social media feeds, etc.
The liberty of the press in the words of Lord Mansfield is, “consists of printing without any
license subject to the consequences of law”. Therefore, we can conclude that freedom of
the press refers to having the freedom to express what one pleases without any prior
permission from law.
Press is a medium of availing knowledge and spreading the vital information of events,
developments, incidents of national interest to the whole nation and thus free and fair
operation of the press makes the backbone of civil society which is capable of critical and
independent thinking and forms its opinion about the country and the government after
scrutinizing the facts of the situation wisely.
Page 2 of 8
2.1.1. Freedom to spread information
Without this liberty, freedom of the press is nugatory. Though this right is also implicit in
the freedom of expression, Romesh Thapar v State of Madras makes it explicit. The
mainline of difference between the freedom of the press and freedom of expression for an
individual is that an individual can’t communicate to masses on his own, but a press can by
means of its publications on various mediums like print, broadcasts, electronic, etc. Thus,
freedom to spread information is an intrinsic part of freedom of the press.
Page 3 of 8
2.1.6. Freedom to attend and report legislative proceedings
Article 361 of the Constitution equips us with the right of publishing a kosher report of the
parliamentary proceedings. The only limitation of this freedom is that there should be no
mala fide intention behind such publications. When the right of reporting of legislative
proceedings which is implicitly envisaged in the right of expression (A.19) is in discord with
parliamentary privileges (A.105 and A. 194), the right of speech and expression shall
overshadow the parliamentary privileges. Today it is mandatory to do live telecast of the
parliamentary proceedings.
Page 4 of 8
At this juncture, it is essential to take cognisance of the fact that ‘sedition’ is no ground to
impose reasonable restrictions as envisaged under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
In State of Bihar v Shailabala Devi, SC held that the speeches made by any person (citizen or
non-citizen) which encourage the people to commit offences like dacoity, murder, robbery,
etc is without a doubt a threat to the security of the state. Hence such a speech will be
considered as a prejudice towards the sovereignty or integrity of the state, and the order to
stop or curtail such communication is covered under reasonable restrictions of A.19(2).
The term “public order” has a broad meaning and covers a multitude of actions which may
endanger the security of the state. In Madhu Limaye v Sub Divisional
Magistrate Monghyr SC held that the term “public order” can be construed as “no
insurrections or riots or disturbance to public peace.”
In Ramji Lal Modi v State of UP the constitutionality of the Section 295A of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC) was being questioned. The argument advanced was that the mentioned section
infringes the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression guaranteed under Part III in Article
19(1)(a) under the Constitution. The petitioner, who was the printer, publisher and the
editor was held guilty of offences under Section 295A of the IPC. Further, it was contended
that this section has no protection under the reasonable restrictions of A.19(2) of the
constitution. The SC dismissed this argument and held that if an individual by exercising
his/her right the freedom of expression causes public disorder, then he or she can be
prosecuted under the mentioned section which comes within the purview of reasonable
restrictions.
The SC under Article 129 & the HCs under Article 215 of the constitution is empowered to
take punitive actions for contempt of court. It was further held in C.K. Daphtary v O.P.
Gupta it was held that the S.228 of IPC and A.129 of the constitution are valid and are
covered within the purview of reasonable restrictions enshrined in Article 19(2) of the
constitution. Thus,we can infer from the above discussion that the freedom of speech and
expression is prone to Articles 19(2), 129, and 215 of the constitution.
3.6. Defamation
Article 19(1)(a) in no manner gives a license to cause damage to the reputation of a person
in the name of freedom of speech and expression. Causing damage to an individual’s
reputation is considered as defamation and is a stringent limitation to the right of freedom
of speech and expression.
Such activities can jeopardize the government’s efforts to promulgate and maintain friendly
relations with foreign nations and bring lucrative results out of those results for India.
In Jagan Nath v Union of India, SC held that all commonwealth countries are foreign
countries for the purpose of Article 19 (2). However, another fact to take cognisance of is
that, members of the commonwealth countries including Pakistan aren’t the members of
foreign states for the purpose of the Indian constitution.
Just like the terms “public order” and “friendly relations with foreign states”, this ground of
reasonable restriction was incorporated in the constitution via the Constitution (First
Amendment) Act, 1951. In State of Bihar v Shailabala Devi, it was held by SC that any
communication which leads to incitement of any criminal act can be restricted and any
order for such ban will fall within the purview of reasonable restrictions envisaged in Article
19(2) of constitution.
The above mentioned seven grounds of reasonable restrictions act as a line in the sand for
the demarcation of the right to freedom of speech and expression which also includes the
right to freedom of press. So, one can infer that the right to free press prevails within the
boundaries of reasonable restrictions enshrined in Article 19(2) of the constitution.
4.Conclusion
Currently, India’s rank in the World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders is
140th amongst 180 countries. This rank has taken some serious declines in the last decade
from 133 to 136 in 2017; 136 to 138 in 2018; 138 to 140 in 2019. This dip is due to the
beating, prosecution and even deaths of journalists on the line of work. We often see
videos of journalists getting lynched and being publicly beaten for trying to expose
politicians or government officials. This shows some serious concern pertaining to the
freedom given to press in the country with the world’s biggest Constitution and
bureaucratic setup.
Press is supposed to be the voice of the public to the government, but in modern times, a
contrast to this can be observed, where some of the major mainstream media houses are
marketing the politicals parties while criticizing the oppositions parties and not discussing
Page 7 of 8
the relevant issues like public welfare, corruption, analysis of government schemes, etc.
Though it is also true that forums like WhatsApp, YouTube, and Facebook which are totally
independent are have become prone to fake news leading to mob lynching, fear-
mongering, hate speech, propaganda spreading and indecency promoting, which highlights
the need of some reasonable restrictions of the press.
Though, without a shred of doubt, for preserving democracy and not promoting informed
citizenry in the nation, we have to give reasonable freedom to the press. The present
government has tried to curb this freedom by amending RTI Act, Whistleblower Act, and
proposing the Sedition Act in the parliament which in the opinion of the author goes
against the basic tenets of the constitution of tearing apart the very fabric of democracy.
Page 8 of 8