Law and Order situation cannot be a ground to ban newspaper

In para 8 of the Moot Proposition it is clearly cited by the respondents that due to law and order
situation the publication of the two national dailies “The Phantom” and “The Voice” have been
banned. But it is pertinent to note that as per article 19(2) reasonable restriction can be imposed
in the interest of ‘public order’ and not in the ‘interest of law and order’. The distinction between
`public order' and `law and order' is a fine one, but nevertheless clear.1

A proper test to distinguish between 'law and order' and 'public order' is whether the complained
acts led to disturbance of ordinary lives of the community so as to amount a disturbance of the
public order or it merely affected an individual leaving the tranquility of society undisturbed. It
is, therefore, said that the essential distinction between the concepts of 'public order' and 'law and
order' is not in the nature or quality of the act but in the degree, potentiality and extent of its
reach upon society.2

In the case of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar 3 this Hon’ble court stated that an
activity which affects `law and order' may not necessarily affect `public order' and an activity
which might be prejudicial to `public order' may not necessarily affect `security of the State'. A
restriction imposed with `law and order' in mind would be least intruding into the guaranteed
freedom while `public order' may qualify for a greater degree of restriction since public order is a
matter of even greater social concern.

Therefore one has to imagine three concentric circles. Law and order represents the
largest circle within which is the next circle representing public order and the smallest circle
represents security of State4 and it can be construed that if law and order is infringed than it does
not mean that public order has also been infringed and if public order is infringed it cannot be
concluded that security of the state has been questioned.5

Therefore in light of the case of Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras, 6 in which the Court took
the view that local breaches of public order were no grounds for restricting the freedom of
speech guaranteed by the Constitution, it is submitted that the ground of law and order cannot
constitute a reasonable ground of restriction on fundamental right to speech and expression of the
two national dailies “The Phantom” and “The Voice”.

1
Re-Ramlila Maidan Incident Dt ... vs Home Secretary And Ors
2
Nilesh Bansilal Gaywal @ Ghaywal vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors, WRIT PETITION NO.1768 OF
2021
3
AIR 1966 SC 740
4
The Superintendent, Central ... vs Ram Manohar Lohia 1960 AIR 633, 1960 SCR (2) 821
5
Ibid
6
1950 SCR 594