CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH

BIHAR

..A PROJECT ON
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION
Submitted to….. submitted by….

Poonam madam Gautam Kumar ranjan

Prof. of Constitutional law B.A.LL.B. (H)
School Of Law and Governance 2ND Semester
Roll.no- CUSB1613125018

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
 I would like to express my gratitude to all those who
provide me any help they give me in preparing this
project .I would like to give my special thanks to my
CONSTIUTIONAL LAW professor POONAM
MADAM, who guided and directed how to make this
project a wonderful one.
I would also like to pay my gratitude to CUSB librarian
and computer lab staff members who contributed and
provided me books and required sources . I am also
thankful towards my friend MANISH KUMAR SINGH
who helped me in making this project.
Lastly but not the least ,I would like to thanks my parents
who supported me financially and encouraged me to
proceed with this project.

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.
The rights conferred under Article 19 of the Constitution are the rights of free man.
These are natural law or common law rights and not created by a statute. As such every citizen is
entitled to exercise such rights provided conditions to be imposed whenever so required by the
State.
The freedom of speech and expression is a very important fundamental right. It is
indispensable for the development of one’s own individuality and for the success of
parliamentary democracy. It is said that in a democracy the right to free expression is not only
the right of an individual but rather a right of the community to hear and be informed.
Our Constitution is based on the principle of checks and balances.
The Preamble expresses two ideas which complement each other, namely:
1. Rights of the individual which correspond to the duties of the State towards the individual
2. Duties of the individual towards the State which correspond to the rights of the society against
the individual.
The State is under an obligation not to infringe upon the rights of the individual. Similarly, the
individual is obliged to contribute to the social welfare. So, every attempt needs to be made so
that this reasonable means does not get disturbed. We are given the freedom of speech, we can
express ourselves. But, the beauty of the freedom lies in its limits in the interest of the society.

MEANING OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH & EXPRESSION

The Constitution of India guarantees various fundamental rights to its citizens. One such
important right is right to freedoms under Article 19. This includes right to
1.freedom of speech and expression,
2.right to assemble peacefully and without arms,
3.freedom to form associations and unions,
4. right to move freely throughout the territory of India,
5. right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India
6. right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

Under this research work the researcher closely concerns with Article 19(1)(a) of the
Consitution of India. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees that all citizens shall have the right to freedom
of speech and expression. This right is available only to every citizen of India and not available
to any person who is not a citizen of India i.e. foreign nationals.23 The freedom of speech and
expression has been held to be basic and indivisible for a
democratic polity. The freedom of speech and expression means the right to express one’s
conviction and opinions freely by words of mouth, writing, printing, pictures, photographs,
cartoons or any other mode. It means freedom of speech and expression is to express one’s
convictions and opinions or ideas freely, through any communicable medium or visible
representation, such as gesture, signs and the like.24 It means to freely propogate, communicate
or circulate one’s opinion or views. In other words, freedom of speech and expression to lay
what sentiments, a free citizen pleases, before the public. Freedom of speech is the bulwark of a
democratic Government and it attaches great importance to this freedom, because without the
freedom of speech appeal to reason, which is the basis of democracy, cannot be made. Freedom
of speech opens up channels of free discussions of issues and play a crucial role in public
opinion on social, political and economic matters.1 In, one of the earliest judgments, Romesh
Thappar v. State of Madras262 Chief Justice Patanjali Sastri observed that:
“… (The freedom) lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations, for without free political
discussion, no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the processes of
popular government, is

2
possible. A freedom of such amplitude might involve risks of abuse. But the framers of the
Constitution may well have reflected with Madison, who was the leading spirit in the preparation
of the First Amendment of
the Federal Constitution, that it is better to leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant
growth, than by pruning them away, to injure the vigor of those yielding the proper fruits.”

In the same judgment, the Court held that the public interest in freedom stems from the
requirement that members of the democratic society should be sufficiently informed that they
may influence intelligently the decisions which may affect themselves.27
Freedom of speech and expression should, therefore, receive generous support from all those
who believe in the participation of people in the administration. The freedom of speech and
expression includes freedom of circulation and propagation of ideas and, therefore, the right
extends to the citizen to use the media to answer the criticism leveled against the views
propagated by him. Every citizen has undoubted right to express what sentiments he pleases.
This freedom must, however, be exercised with circumspection and care must be taken not to
trench on the rights of other citizens or to jeopardise public interest.
Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer has observed that:
“Right to express one’s thought is meaningless if it is not accompanied by relaxed right to secure
all information on matters of public concern from relevant public authorities. However, to ensure
that there is no
harm in inserting the freedom of information on a specific corollary to Article 19 of the
Constitution”

Freedom of speech and expression has long been a hallmark of a healthy democracy and
a free society. In England, this right is enjoyed as a result of the application of the principle of
‘the Rule of Law’. Under English Law the freedom of expression is, of course, intrinsically
important. It is valued for its own sake. In an English case, it was held that freedom of
expression has four broad social purposes to serve:
(i) It helps an individual to attain self-fulfillment;
(ii) It assists in the discovery of truth;
(iii) It strengthens the capacity of an individual in participating in decision-making;
 (iv) It provides a mechanism by which it would be possible to establish a reasonable balance
between stability and social change.

SCOPE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

The judiciary has been enlarging the area covered by the fundamental right to freedom
of speech and expression. Freedom of speech and expression is a vital feature that a
democracy runs with. For any democracy to thrive, people must be given the liberty to
express their feeling without restriction. This very important feature of the freedom of
speech and expression is enshrined to the Indian citizens by Article 19(1)(a) of the
Constitution of India. It provides that all citizens irrespective of colour, creed and
religion have the right to raise their voice in matters of importance or otherwise without any
restriction within or without. This freedom comes in for the assumption that rationality of men
comes above everything else, and every individual, by his/her own discretion and wisdom knows
what is good or bad.
While discussing the scope of freedom of speech and expression the Supreme Court at
many times has said that the words freedom of speech and expression must be broadly
constructed to include the freedom to circulate one’s views by words of mouth or in
writing or through audio-visual instrumentalities. It therefore, includes the right to
propagate one’s views through the print media or through any other communication
channel e.g. the radio and the television.39 The Court held that these rights are great and
basic rights which are recognised and guaranteed as the natural rights and inherent in
the status of a citizen in a free country.

FREEDOM OF PRESS
The right to free speech and expression includes the right not only to publish but also to circulate
information and opinion. Without the right to circulate, the right to free speech and expression
would have little meaning. The freedom of circulation has been held to be as essential as the
freedom of publication.

In Sakal Papers v. Union of India40 the Supreme Court held that the State could not make laws
which directly affect the circulation of a newspaper for that would amount to a violation of the
freedom of speech. The right under Article 19(1)(a) extends not only to the matter which the
citizen is entitled to circulate but also to the volume of circulation.41 This case arouse out of a
challenge to the newsprint policy of the Government which restricted the number of pages a
newspaper was entitled to print.

Likewise, in Bennett Coleman & co. v. Union of India42 the Supreme Court held that newspaper
should be left free to determine their pages and their circulation. This case arouse out of a
constitutional challenge to the validity of the Newspaper (Price & Page) Act, 1956 which
empowered the Government to regulate the allocation of space for advertisement matter. The
court held that the curtailment of advertisements would fall foul of Article 19(1)(a), since it
would have a direct impact on the circulation of newspapers. The court held that any restriction
leading to a loss of advertising revenue would affect circulation and thereby impinge on the
freedom of speech.

In Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India,43 a challenge to the imposition of customs

duty on import of newsprint was allowed and the impugned levy struck down. The Supreme
Court held that the expression „freedom of the press‟ though not expressly used in Article 19
was comprehended within Article 19(1)(a) and meant freedom from interference from authority
which would have the effect of interference with the content & the circulation of newspapers.

In LIC v. Manubhai Shah44 the Supreme Court held that „the freedom of speech and expression‟
must be broadly construed to include the freedom to circulate one‟s views by word of mouth or
in writing or through audio visual media. This includes the right to propagate one‟s views
through the print or other media. The honourable court observed:
Freedom to air one‟s view is the lifeline of any democratic institution and any attempt to stifle or
suffocate or gag this right would sound a death knell to democracy and would help user in
autocracy or dictatorship.
The court held that any attempt to deny the right to circulation and propagation of ideas must be
frowned upon unless it falls with in the mischief of Article 19(2).

Right to Receive Information

The right to ‘freedom of speech and expression’ in Article 19(1)(a) has been held to include the
right to acquire information and disseminate the same. It includes the right to communicate it
through any available media whether print or electronic or audiovisual, such as advertisements,
movie, articles or speech etc. This freedom includes the freedom to communicate or circulate
one’s opinion without interference to as large a population in the country, as well as abroad, as it
is possible to reach. The Supreme Court giving a broad dimension to Article 19(1)(a) said that
freedom of speech not only includes communication but also receipt of information as they are
the two sides of the same coin. Right to know is a basic right of the citizens of a free country and
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constituion protects this right. The right to receive information springs
from the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a). The
freedom to receive and to communicate information and ideas without interference is an
important aspect of the freedom of speech and expression because without adequate information,
a person cannot form an informed opinion.

In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain80 the Supreme Court held that Article 19(1)(a) not only
guarantees freedom of speech and expression, it also ensures and comprehends the right of the
citizen to know, the right to receive information regarding matters of public concern. The
Government is not the owner, but timely trusted with rights of the real beneficiary on the estate
of the State. Similar views were expressed, while upholding that “right to know is implicit in
right of free speech and expression, and disclosure of information regarding functioning of the
Government must be the rule.”
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that:
“We are in a democratic polity where dissemination of information is the foundation of
the system. Keeping the citizens informed is an obligation ofthe Government. It is
equally the responsibility of society to adequately educate every component of it so that
the social level is kept up.”
Further in Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India v.
Cricket Association of Bengal83 the Supreme Court reiterated the proposition that the freedom
of speech and expression includes the right to acquire information and to disseminate the same.
In the Tata Press Case84 the Supreme Court concluded that the “commercial speech” cannot be
denied the protection of Article 19(1)(a) merely because the same is issued by businessmen.
“Commercial speech” is a part of freedom of speech guaranteed under the Article 19(1)(a). The
public at large has a right to receive the “commercial speech” and the Article protects the right of
an individual “to listen, read and receive” the “commercial speech”. The protection of the Article
is available both to the speakers as well as the recipient of the speech.
It has been ruled that when a substantially significant population body is illiterate or does not
have easy access to ideas or information, it is important that all available means of
communication, particularly audio-visual communication, are utilised not just for entertainment
but also for education, information, propogation of scientific ideas and the like.85
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dinesh Trivedi, M.P and Others v. Union of India observed
that in modern constitutional democracies, it is axiomatic that citizens have a right to know about
the affairs of the Government which, having been elected by them, seek to formulate sound
policies of governance aimed at their welfare. The Court further observed that democracy
expects openness and openness is concomitant of a free society and the sunlight is a best
disinfectant. The Delhi High Court emphasized that the right to receive information acquires
great significance in the context of elections87 and ruled that the Election Commission shall
secure the antecedents of the candidates including assets, education etc. for the perusal of the
voters. This is not an extra qualification imposed by the High Court but what the Hon’ble High
Court was seeking to achieve is that a voter after knowing the background of the candidate will
vote properly. On appeal the Hon’ble Supreme Court agreed with the Delhi High Court and
upheld the right of a voter to know about the antecedents of a candidate as a part of his
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a). Democracy cannot survive without free and fairly
informed voters. Subsequently the Central Government amended the Representation of the
People Act, 1951, by passing the Representation of the People (Third Amendment) Act, 2002.

It is, thus, quite clear that right to acquire and get information is a fundamental right under
the Indian Constitution. But what type of information it includes? Obviously, not all types of
information, but only the information relating to matters of public or common importance
affecting people in general. Till now, most of the Government Departments were denying
information to the public under the Official Secret Act. But various judgments quoted above
have given this right to people and it will no longer be possible for Government to deny such
information unless it does not concern the public at all.
Voters Have Right to Know About their Candidates
In a landmark judgment in Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms4, a three
judge bench held that the amended Electoral Reforms Law passed by Parliament is
unconstitutional as being volatile of citizen’s right to know under Art. 19(1)(g).
Grounds of Restrictions on Freedom of Speech and Expression
It is necessary to maintain and preserve freedom of speech and expression in a democracy, so
also it is necessary to place some curbs on this freedom for the maintenance of social order. No
freedom can be absolute or completely unrestricted.
Article 19(2) specifies the grounds to which reasonable restrictions on the freedom of
speech and expression can be imposed:
a) Security of State: Under Article 19(2) reasonable restrictions can be imposed on fredom of
speech and expression in the interest of security of State. The term ‘security of state’ refers only
to serious and aggravated forms of public disorder e.g. rebellion, waging war against the State,
insurrection and not ordinary breaches of public order and public safety, e.g. unlawful assembly,
riot, affray. While, speeches or expressions on the part of an individual, which incite to or
encourage the commission of violent crimes, such as murder, are matters which would
undermine the security of State.112 The expression ‘security of the state’ in Article 19(2) does not
merely mean as danger to the security of the entire country, but endangering the security of a part
of the State would also involve a threat to the security of the State.
b) Friendly relations with Foreign States: This ground was added by the Constitution (First
Amendment) Act, 1951. The object behind the provision is to prohibit unrestrained malicious
propaganda against a foreign friendly state, which may jeopardise the maintainance of good
relations between India and that State. No similar provision is present in any other Constitution
of the World. In India, the Foreign Relations Act, (XII of 1932) provides punishment for libel by
Indian citizens against foreign dignitaries. Interest of friendly relations with foreign States,
would not justify the suppression of fair criticism of foreign policy of the Government. It is to be
noted that members of the Commonwealth including Pakistan is not a ‘foreign state’ for the
purposes of this Constitution. The question arises before the Supreme Court whether a restriction
can be imposed on the freeom of speech and expression on the ground of its prejudicial to a
Commenwealth counrty. The Court stated that a counrty may not be regarded as a foreign State
for the purpose of the Constitution, but may be regarded as a foreign power for other purposes.
The result is that freedom of speech and expression cannot be restricted on the ground that the
matter is adverse to Pakistan.
c) Public Order: This ground was also added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951.
The concept of ‘public order’ is wider than ‘security of state’.‘Public order’ is an expression of
wide connotation and signifies that state of tranquility which prevails among the members of
political society as a result of internal regulations enforced by the Government which they have
established. Public order is something more than ordinary maintenance of law and order. ‘Public
order’ is synonymous with public peace, safety and tranquility.The test for determining whether
an act affects law and order or public order is to see whether the act leads to the disturbances of
the current of life of the community so as to amount to a disturbance of the public order or
whether it affects merely an individual being the tranquility of the society undisturbed. Anything
that disturbs public tranquility or public peace disturbs public order.
Thus, communal disturbances and strikes promoted with the sole object of causing unrest
among workmen are offences against public order. Public order thus, implies absence of violence
and an orderly state of affairs in which citizens can peacefully pursue their normal avocation of
life. Thus, creating internal disorder or rebellio would affect public order.118 However, mere
criticism of Government does not necessarily disturb public order.119 In its external aspect
‘public safety’ means protection of the country from foreign aggression. Under public order the
State would be entitled to prevent propaganda for a state of war with India. The words ‘in
the interest of public order’ includes not only such utterances as are directly intended to lead to
disorder but also those that have the tendency to lead to disorder.
Thus, a law punishing utterances made with the deliberate intention to hurt the religious feelings
of any class of persons is valid because it imposes a restriction on the right of free speech in the
interest of public order since such speech or writing has the tendency to create public disorder
even if in some cases those activities may not actually lead to a breach of peace. But there must
be reasonable and proper nexus or relationship between the restrictions and the achievements of
public order.
d) Decency or Morality: These are terms of variable content having no fixed meaning
for ideas about decency or morality; vary from society to socisty and time to time
depending on the standards of morals prevailing in the contemporary society.121
Thus, words ‘morality’ or ‘decency’ are words of wide meaning. Sections 292 to
294 of the Indian Penal Code provide instances of restrictions on the freedom of
speech and expression in the interest of decency or morality. These sections prohibit
the sale or distribution or exhibition of obscene words, etc. in public places.122 The
Apex Court123 ruled that the words ‘decency and morality’is not confined to sexual
morality alone. The ordinary meaning of the ‘decency’ indicates that the action must
be in conformity with the current standards of behaviour or propriety. The Court has
cited with approval the following observations from an English case
“….Indecency is not confined to sexual indecency; indeed it is difficult to find any limit short of
saying that it includes anything which an ordinary decent man or woman would find to be
shocking, disgusting or revolting….”
e) Contempt of Court: Restriction on the freedom of speech and expression can be imposed if it
exceeds the reasonable and fair limit and amounts to contempt of court. It cannot be held as law
that in view of the constitutional protection of freedom of speech and expression, no one can be
proceeded with for the contempt of court on the allegation of scandalising or intending to
scandalise the authority of any Court.Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, provides
that ‘contempt of court’ may be either ‘civil contempt’ or ‘criminal contempt’.
f) Defamation: A statement, which injures a man’s reputation, amounts to defamation.
Defamation consists in exposing a man to hatred, ridicule, or contempt. According to Winfield
defamation is the publication of a statement which reflects on a person’s reputation and tends to
lower him in estimation of rightthinking members of society generally or tends to make them
shun or avoid him.
The civil law relating to defamation is still uncodified in India and subject to certain exceptions.
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, defines the offence of defamation. It recognises both
slander and libel.
g) Incitement to an offence: This ground was also added by the Constitution (First Amendment)
Act, 1951. Obviously, freedom of speech and expression cannot confer a right to incite people to
commit offences. The word ‘offence’ is defined as any act or omission made punishable by law
for the time being in force. The incitement to an offence does not refer to incitement to break a
law. Thus, an incitement to a breach of every civil law is not necessarily contemplated by Article
19(2).
h) Sovereignty and Integrity of India: This ground was also added to Article 19(2) by the
Consitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. The main purpose is to guard the freedom of
speech and expression from being used to assail the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the
Country.

CONCLUSION
It can be easily concluded that right to freedom of speech and expression is one of the most
important fundamental rights. It includes circulating one’s views by words or in writing or
through audio-visual instrumentalities, advertisements or through any other communication
channel. It also comprises of right to information, freedom of press etc.
Thus, this fundamental right has a vast scope. From the above case law analysis, it is evident that
the Court has always placed a broad interpretation on the value and contents of Article 19(1)(a),
making it subjective only to the restrictions permissible under Article 19(2). Efforts by intolerant
authorities to curb or choke this freedom have always been firmly repelled, more so when public
authorities have betrayed tyrannical tendencies.