UNIT- 1

 Definition of “Media”
Media refers to the means or channels of communication that are used to transmit
information, news, entertainment, and other content to a large audience. It encompasses
various forms, including print media (newspapers, magazines), broadcast media
(television, radio), digital media (websites, social media), and other platforms through
which information is disseminated.

The primary purpose of media is to provide information, facilitate communication, and

entertain. It plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion, influencing social and cultural
norms, and serving as a watchdog by holding individuals and institutions accountable.

 Forms of “Media”
Media can be classified into four types:
1. Print Media (Newspapers, Magazines)
2. Broadcast Media (TV, Radio)
3. Outdoor or Out of Home (OOH)
4. Media Internet

a) Print Media:
Newspapers: Periodical publications containing news, articles, and advertisements. It
can be further classified into the following;
o National Newspapers
o Daily newspapers (Local/Regional)
o Special Audience newspapers
Magazines: Periodicals that cover a wide range of topics, often with a focus on
lifestyle, fashion, or specific interests. It is further classified into the following;

Consumer magazines Business Publications

o General Interest Magazine Professional Publications
o Glamour Magazine Trade Journals
o Film Magazine Industrial & Institutional
o Special Interest Magazine Publications

o Women Lifestyle Magazine

b) Broadcast Media:
Television (TV): Broadcasting visual content, including news, shows, and movies.
Radio: Transmitting audio content, such as news, music, talk shows, and interviews.

c) Support Media:
 Outdoor advertising: It includes bill boards, boarding, neon signs posters etc.
Transit Advertising: Uses billboards, neon signs and electronic messages.
Cinema and Video Advertising: It involves use of cinema halls and video tapes to
deliver the ad message. Commercials are shown before films and previews carrying
ad message.

d) Internet:
Internet is a rapidly growing medium of advertising. It is a future medium which
offers limitless advertising opportunities. It involves use of world wide web to
showcase a website or e-commerce portal to the world.
Advertising through internet involves email marketing, social media marketing,
online ads and mobile marketing.

 What is Freedom of Press/ Media?

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.

 Why Freedom of the Press? [Importance & Need]

As per Indian Newspapers v Union of India, the objective of the press is to supplement the
public interest by printing the facts and opinions without which the citizens of the country
cannot make well informed rational judgments. Freedom of the press is in the crux of social
and political inter-course. It is the paramount duty of the judiciary to prop the freedom of the
press and refute all laws and executive actions that interfere with it as opposed to the
constitutional provisions.
Media is referred as the fourth pillar of democratic system and it is supposed to be free and
independent from any sort of restriction. The freedom of media is a sine qua non for attaining
a democracy which will be committed to preserve transparent governance and ethos of good.
Importance-
 Media points out faults within the working of governing system of India.
 Media acts as a connecting chain between public and government.
 Media plays vital role in maintaining transparency within democratic system.
 Media can promote basic ideals and concerned information of democracy which will
spread awareness amongst the citizens regarding their rights.
.
 Article 19 and Freedom of Press [Rights of Media]
Freedom of the press is implicit under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which
provides for the freedom of speech and expression under Part III (fundamental rights). It
does not explicitly provide the term “freedom of the press” anywhere but it becomes quite
clear from this Constituent assembly debate when Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar replies to a
question of “Article 19 not including ‘freedom of the press’” saying that the press is just
another method of quoting an individual citizen and when anyone chooses to write in a
newspaper, they are merely exercising their right of expression and thus, there is absolutely
no need to separately mentions the freedom of the press.
Implicit Right: Freedom of the press is not expressly protected by the Indian legal system
but it is impliedly protected under article 19(1) (a) of the constitution.
However, Freedom of the press is also not absolute.

 Scope of Freedom of Press under Article 19(1)(a)

Article 19(1)(a) says that: All citizens shall have freedom of speech and expression.

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 [AIR 1950 SC] makes it explicit and held that the
freedom of speech and expression includes freedom to propagate ideas which is
ensured by freedom of circulation of a publication, as publication is of little value
without circulation. 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.

2. Freedom to criticize: The press, just like individuals have the liberty to criticize the
government, its officials, its policies, its actions, its laws, its statements, etc. However,
the press cannot take abuse this right and cannot provoke the public against the
government or cannot abet riots, rebels, or mutiny or insecurity of the state or the
government.

3. Freedom to receive the information: Again, the heart of the liberty to press. If the
press is not equipped with the information, it cannot empower the public with the
knowledge and thus, the right of expression will become futile because there will be
no access to information on whose basis anything can be expressed.

4. Freedom to conduct interview: This right is necessary to bring in first-hand

knowledge from the experts on the particulars subjects and to enlighten the society at
large. Though this right is not absolute, there are three caveats to it as follow:
 Interview will only take place on the consent of the interviewee;
 Interview shall stop when the interviewee wants to it to be;
 Interviewer can’t force interviewee to answer any question against his/her will.
 5. Freedom to report court proceedings: In the words of Jeremy Bentham, “the soul of
justice is publicity”. In Sahara India Real Estate Corpn ltd v SEBI [AIR 2012 SC],
SC held that it is the right of the media to report the judicial proceedings. In Saroj
Iyer v Maharashtra Medical (Council) of Indian Medicine [AIR 2002 Bom], SC
held that the right to print faithful reports of the legal proceedings witnessed is
available even if it is against quasi-judicial tribunals.

6. Freedom to attend and report legislative proceedings: Article 361 of the

Constitution equips us with the right of publishing a proper 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.

7. Freedom to act as an advertising platform: We know that the major income of most
of the presses comes from the advertisement, whether it is a radio, or news channel, or
mobile application, or newspaper. It was after Tata Press Ltd. v Mahanagar
Telephone Nigam Ltd. [A.I.R. 1995 S.C.] that SC incorporated the right to
advertisement as a part of the right to freedom of expression. It was held that
commercial speech and expression shall be deemed to be part of speech and
expression under Article 19(1) (a).

8. Freedom to broadcast: In the modern age of technology, power to broadcast is

essential as it is one of the major channels to spread information. This right not only
includes broadcasting on news channels, radios, but also on the internet like websites,
blogs, mobile applications. We have witnessed some of the most reliable journalism
on these platforms like Alt News, ThePrint, TheWire, Quint, etc.

 Reasonable Limitations of Press’ Freedom [Media Censorship]

As freedom of press derives its powers from Article 19(1)(a), it is also subject to the
reasonable limitations imposed on A.19(1)(a) under A19(2) which are explained as follow:

1. Sovereignty and integrity of the state: Any form of speech or any expression which
hampers the sovereignty or integrity of the state would be covered under this
restriction. The right of freedom to speech and expression can’t be allowed to be used
as a weapon against the sovereignty or integrity of the state.
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.

2. Security of the state: The freedom of expression cannot be exercised in a way so that
it becomes a threat to the security of the state in any manner. Any communication
 which incites the people to cause social unrest, rebels, violence, riots, etc against the
state and its subjects would be covered under this restriction.

In State of Bihar v Shailabala Devi [1952 AIR SC], 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
and is covered under reasonable restrictions of A.19(2).

3. Public Order: This term was inserted by the Constitutional (First Amendment) Act,
1951. This clause was added to curtail the effects of Romesh Thappar v State of
Madras where the SC had held that the right to circulation is an intrinsic organ of
Right to freedom of expression.
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 [AIR 1971 SC], SC held that the term “public order” can be
construed as “no insurrections or riots or disturbance to public peace.”

4. Decency or morality: For preserving the decency or morality in the country, the state
has the authority to limit the freedom of speech and expression of an individual.
Further elaboration of this ground is reflected in Sections 292 to 294 of the IPC. In
Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra [AIR 1965 SC], SC held that the S. 292 of
IPC is constitutional as it prohibits obscenity in public places and promulgates public
decency and morality.

5. Contempt of Court: There is no doubt that freedom of speech and expression is very
crucial for societal development, but on the other hand, providing and maintaining
justice and equity is also equally substantial. Though, the freedom of speech and
expression reckons but it can’t be wielded to cancel out courts’ actions of justice.

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 [AIR 1971 SC] 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.

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. No one is allowed to
expose a person to hate, ridicule or contempt by means of any expression, signs or
gestures.
 7. Friendly relations with foreign states: Just like with the term “public order”, this
ground was also inserted in Article 19(2) of the Constitution via Constitution (First
Amendment) Act, 1951. This main objective of incorporating this restriction was to
counter the antagonistic and mala fide propaganda against any foreign country which
may have friendly connections with the Republic of India.

In Jagan Nath v Union of India [AIR 1996 SC], SC held that all commonwealth
countries are foreign countries for the purpose of Article 19 (2).

8. Incitement to an offence: Exercising the freedom of speech and expression to incite

an offence would be considered as a threat to the public order. This ground of
reasonable restriction was also incorporated in the constitution via the Constitution
(First Amendment) Act, 1951. In State of Bihar v Shailabala Devi [AIR 1952 SC], 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.

 Liabilities of Media
The rights and liberties accorded to the press in a democratic society give rise to
corresponding responsibilities. These are as follows;
i. PUBLIC’S RIGHT TO KNOW: It is the duty of the media and of journalists to
provide the public with comprehensive and accurate information. The press must
report facts and events without distortion. Resorting to sensationalism may lead
to exaggeration and inaccurate interpretations of facts and events, which can
mislead the public as to the value and significance of the information being
transmitted.
ii. SELF-CENSORSHIP: The press must not only be free of all forms of external
pressure, but also vigilant in avoiding self-censorship, be it intentional or
unwitting. The press must guard against suppressing or slanting the facts out of
fear of violating a taboo or of harming a special interest.
iii. POLLS: When public opinion polls are published, it is essential that the data
collected be verifiable, and that the public be informed of the methodology
employed.
iv. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Journalists and media organizations must avoid not
only conflicts of interest but also the appearance of conflict of interest; they must
be and must appear to be independent, and not allied with any particular political,
financial or other power. Any laxity in this regard jeopardizes the credibility of the
press and of the information it transmits.
 v. INTEGRITY IN THE PRESENTATION AND ILLUSTRATION OF NEWS:
Headlines, captions and cutlines must respect the meaning, spirit and content of
the texts, photos and illustrations to which they are attached. They should neither
inflict harm nor reflect prejudice. Sensationalism should be avoided. Headlines
should be free of bias and editorializing. These must faithfully reflect the
information in the pieces they support. Images must not be altered or used in a
way that is degrading or defamatory.
vi. NEWS AND ADVERTISING: The media must establish a clear demarcation
between news and advertisements by presenting them in different ways. Any
failure to do so is liable to cause confusion for readers or viewers. Not only must
the media clearly identify advertorial content or paid programs, but these should
be presented in a way that sets them apart from news content. The media should
refrain from self-promotion in the form of news reports. Not only do such
practices take time or space away from real news, but they compromise the
credibility of the media outlets involved and of their journalists, and decrease
public confidence in the quality of
the information being transmitted.
vii. SOURCES: The media and journalists are obliged to respect the identity of
sources to whom they have promised confidentiality. It is equally important that
journalists verify both the credibility of their sources and the veracity of the
information provided.
viii. ONLINE JOURNALISM AND PROFESSIONAL NORMS: Journalists whose
work is published on the Internet or by means of other new technologies are
expected to adhere to the same professional and ethical norms as those whose
work is transmitted by more traditional media. The principles of impartiality,
accuracy and truthfulness must be respected during research, writing, editing and
publication so as to produce high-quality work.
ix. OBLIGATIONS TO AFFORD PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE MEDIA: The media
and journalists have an obligation to encourage the free circulation of ideas and
the expression of many points of view, be it by publishing letters to the editor,
background papers, press releases, opinion pieces, studies, polls, analyses or by
opening the airwaves to the public. The media should make every effort to reach
all citizens. Regional media should be accessible throughout the area served and
the national media have a duty to reflect regional realities.
x. ATTITUDE OF THE PRESS TOWARDS INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS: The
media and journalists must avoid cultivating or supporting prejudices. Under no
circumstances may the press use language that would be liable to incite hatred,
scorn or violence toward an individual or a group. It is the duty of the media to
prevent discrimination, protect the privacy of individuals, and protect the interests
of the public.
xi. COURT REPORTING: The press has a duty to report the trial which is in the
public interest, but must not obstruct justice by influencing its outcome. Media
coverage of the courts should never amount to “trial by media.” The press should
 be prudent in deciding whether to publish an individual’s criminal record. Mention
can be made only if it is in the public interest.
xii. LIBEL AND SLANDER: If found guilty of wrongfully injuring an individual’s
reputation, journalists and the media can expect to pay damages and may even
incur criminal penalties.
xiii. CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS: It is the responsibility of the media
to find and use the most appropriate ways to correct errors and omissions that
affect individuals or groups. Corrections and clarifications should be made in a
sufficiently prominent way that the public may be aware of them.
 Privileges of Media
i. Indian Constitution: Article 361A of the Indian Constitution provides qualified
privilege to media for publishing the brief, accurate and fair reporting of the
proceedings, but it will not immune the media from the liability under contempt of
House in case of breach of privilege by the media. The law of privileges affects
the press and media. They may be either liable for breach of privilege or contempt
of house.
ii. Press Council Act, 1978: It empowers the Press Council of India to ensure the
freedom of the press and maintain standards in journalism.
iii. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Allows fair and accurate reporting of court
proceedings.
iv. Official Secrets Act, 1923: Protects the media's right to publish information that is
not classified as official secrets.
v. Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995: Regulates the operation of
cable television networks, ensuring certain standards for content.
vi. Information Technology Act, 2000: Recognizes the role of electronic media and
provides a legal framework for electronic records.
vii. Defamation Laws: Allows the media to report truthfully and responsibly on
matters of public interest.
viii. Right to Information Act, 2005: Promotes transparency by providing the media
and citizens the right to access information.
ix. Broadcasting Content Complaints Council (BCCC): Offers a self-regulatory
mechanism for non-news channels, allowing them to address content-related
grievances internally.
x. Copyright Act, 1957: Protects the intellectual property rights of creators,
including those in the media.
 UNIT- 2

DEFAMATION IN MEDIA LAW:

 Meaning & Definition of “Defamation”:

Defamation can harm a person's reputation and livelihood. It is a serious offence. Defamation
includes both written and spoken false statements that can harm someone's reputation,
character, or social standing.
Different definitions of defamation have been given by different jurists.
i) According to Underhill, defamation is false statement to blame one's reputation.
Defamation can be done by words, signs, or scenes. The aim of defamation is to down
plaintiff's reputation.
ii) According to Salmond, defamatory tort is publishing false statements and the
statements of defamation.
iii) According to Winfield, defamation is the statements relating to someone which are
published to down one's reputation. So that right thinking member of society may
despise him.

 Kinds of Defamation:
There are two kinds of defamation:
i) Libel:
a libel is a publication of false and defamatory statement in some permanent from tending to
injure the reputation of another person without lawful justification or excuse. In an action for
libel the statement complained of must be false, permanent in nature and published.
In the case of S.N.M. abdi vs Prafulla Kumar Mohanta (A.I.R. 2002 Orissa 75), an article
published in a newspaper allegedly defamed plaintiff has been considered as libel by the
Orissa High Court and it was said that the plaintiff is entitled to get compensation from the
defendant.

In the case of libel three items are required to be proved:

a) That the statement published by the defendant was false;
b) That such statement was permanent, and
c) That it was defamatory.

ii) Slander:
a slander is false and defamatory, verbal or oral statement in transitory forms intending to
injure the reputation of another without lawful jurisdiction or excuse. Slander is not per se
actionable. Slander is actionable one on proof of special damage.

 Difference: following differences are there in libel and slander

1. Libel is either written or published which is addressed to eye or that can be read and
seen, whereas similar slander is spoken or oral which is addressed to ear and that can
be listen.
 2. In libel the defamatory matter is in permanent form while slander is defamation in
transit form. (Noor Mohammed vs ziauddin, 1991, MPL 503)
3. Libel is both a civil wrong and criminal offence while slander is a civil wrong only,
although the slander is categorized in both- civil and criminal in India.
4. Libel shows greater deliberation and raises a suggestion of malice because it is written
whereas a slander may be uttered in that heat of the moment and under sudden
provocation.
5. Libel is always actionable per e i.e. without the proof of any damage whereas, save in
exceptional cases, slander is actionable only on proof of special damage whereas such
special damage is not required to be proved in India.

 Essential Elements of Defamations:

1. Statement must be defamatory:
The first element of defamation s that the words or statement must be defamatory. Such
words or statement may be treated defamatory by which, in its natural and ordinary sense
it tends to excite adverse opinion or feeling of other persons against the person and people
hatred him, by which a person is injured in his profession, business or trade. Generally,
the following words or statements are considered defamatory:
a) Which tends to holding up to public hatred or excite adverse opinion;
b) Which tends to libelous to plaintiff and degradation of his reputation;
c) Which tends to prejudice a person's private character or credit;
d) Which tends to injure a person in his profession, business or trade, or
e) Which tends to cause a person to be feared, shunned, disliked or avoided by the
neighbours or others.
One more similar case is of 'Marrison vs Richi and Co.'[(1902)4 F 645]. In this case, the
defendant ignorantly published this news that two twins have borne from the plaintiff
whereas the plaintiff was married only two months earlier. The plaintiff filed a suit for
defamation against the defendant in which the court while entertaining it said that without
enquiring the truth of facts, the published news comes under purview of defamation. At
all it may be held that ignorance or unknowness cannot be a base for defence of
defamation and there is no importance of intention in it.

2. The Statement must refer to the plaintiff:

the defamatory statements are to be directed towards the plaintiff or to be made for the
plaintiff, is second essential element. In such cases, the plaintiff has to prove that the
statement refers to him. Such an action can done by referring whole name, brief name,
false name, imaginary name, etc. it is only essential that it may be inferred from such
words or statements that they are referred to plaintiff.

3. The statement must be published:

the third essential element of defamation is publication of such words or statements.
Publication means making known the matter to some person other than the plaintiff. If a
person writes a defamatory matter of plaintiff and puts it into his own pockets or locks it
in his drawer, he is not responsible in action, because there has been no publication.
 In the case of Queens vs Adams [(1888) L.R. 22 Q.B.D. 66] the defendant exhibited
indecent expression in a letter and packed in an envelope and send it to the woman. Such
exhibition was not considered publication because any other person was not supposed to
know about this.

In Nemchand vs khemrajn (Air 1973 raj. 200) it was held by Rajasthan High court that
the publication be considered defamation only when it decreases the reputation of
someone before other persons.

4. False Statements:
Initially the onus of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant intended to
defame him. If such statement is true then it does not cover under the definition of
defamation. Actually, the publication of true statements is a good defence.

5. Publication of Statement by the defendant:

Finally, these statements must be published by the defendant. If these statements are
published by other person by the name of defendant, it is not defamation.

 Media Law And Defamation:

The rapid growth of the media and entertainment industries has provided unprecedented
access to information and enhanced public discourse. This power, however, comes with
inherent risks, including the possibility of defamation. Defamation can occur in the
context of media and entertainment through a variety of mediums, including newspapers,
television, radio, online platforms, social media, and others. It could be articles,
broadcasts, comments, or social media posts.

The media and entertainment industries are frequently caught between freedom of speech
and expression. While the right to free expression is guaranteed by the Indian
Constitution, it is not an absolute right and is subject to reasonable limitations, such as
protecting an individual's reputation.

In a democratic country like India there are certain fundamental right for citizen in which
under Article 19(1)(a)- Right of speech and expression is one of them. This right is
however subject to various restrictions under Article 19(2); defamation being one of
them.

Further in relation to the media law, the question arises as to which production of news
amounts to defamation and which holds the protection of freedom of speech and
expression. Media plays a very vital role in reaching to the people through the means of
news and communicating them to the public large. It is the obligation of media that
whatever news they are printing or broadcasting includes a fairness in approach and
doesn't have a biased approach. Whether it is print media or broadcasting media, one has
to keep in mind the publication doesn't lead to a defamatory statement.
However, legislature gives room for the exceptions in the matters. Defamation holds the
following defences- (i) plea of truth, (ii) fair comment, (iii) privilege, (iv) apology and
withdrawal and (v) consent. If these are the cases then the matter or the statement doesn't
lead to defamation or a defamatory statement.

Constitutional Aspect-
The constitutional aspect of the media law involves to certain fundamental freedoms.
There is no direct freedom given in concerned with media law but indirect freedom falls
under the Article 19. This article gives the freedom of speech and if seen in relation to
media, Article 19(1) enumerates the freedom of speech and expression. This fundamental
right plays a very vital role in relation to the freedom of media. The right given to the
media person also brings some of the restrictions to it. One can't use the right to its
extreme, the other laws have to be kept with it at the time of implementation.

Media Responsibility-
The news which is communicated by the media is at a very great influential level.
Therefore, any news which leads to a doubt can create a chaos worldwide. Any form of
media before publishing it at public platform should properly be analysed and should not
leave any doubt of conflict regarding its truthfulness. It is the moral duty of the media to
serve the nation with a clear-cut surety of news. Before any of the statutory rights, it a
moral duty of the media to safeguard the power of media by accessing it within its ambit
of jurisdiction and not creating an evil impact on the nation.

Further looking at the other laws which restricts the powers of the freedom of speech and
expression is under IPC; sec 499 which states the defamation compiled with sections
500,501,502 of IPC issuing to the punishment of the level of the offence committed. The
statutory provisions are framed for the legal regulations to curb the regulating of the fake
information to the mass.
Defamation is both a criminal (which carries a prison sentence) and a civil offence
(punishable through the award of damages) in India. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)
codifies the criminal law on defamation, whereas defamation is penalised as a civil
offence under the law of torts. Defamation is defined in Section 499, and the punishment
is outlined in Section 500.

Case Laws-
In Sakal Papers ltd. V. Union of India [AIR 1962 SCR], in this case, the Daily
Newspapers Order, 1960, which fixed a minimum price and number of pages, which a
newspaper is entitled to publish, was challenged as unconstitutional. The state justified
the law as a reasonable restriction on a business activity of a citizen. The Supreme Court
struck down the order rejecting the state's argument. The court opined that, the right of
freedom of speech and expression couldn't be taken away with the object of placing
restrictions on the business activity of the citizens. Freedom of speech can be restricted
only on the grounds mentioned in clause (2) of Article 19.
 In K. A. Abbas V. Union of India [AIR 1971 SCR], the petitioner for the first time
challenged the validity of censorship as violative of his fundamental right of speech and
expression. The supreme court however observed that, pre- censorship of films under the
Cinematography Act was justified under Article 19(2) on the grounds that films have to
be treated separately from other forms of art and expression because a motion picture was
able to stir up emotions more deeply and thus, classification of films between two
categories ‘A’ (for adults only) and ‘U’ (for all) was brought about.

MEDIA & CRIME OF SEDITION

Criticism of government is not sedition. The expression ‘sedition’ generally means
defamation of state. But the legal meaning of ‘sedition’ is different.

 Definition: Section 124A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 defines and punishes sedition as
follows:
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible
representations, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or
excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law
in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life to which fine may be added, or
with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or
with fine.
Explanation 1: The expression ‘disaffection’ includes disloyalty and all feelings of
enmity.
Explanation 2: Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the
Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting
or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence
under this section.
Explanation 3: Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other
action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or
disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.

 Meaning: Sedition is a crime against the state. The word 'seditio' in latin means
'going aside'.
According to decision in Indramani Singh v. State of Manipur case [1965], sedition is
a comprehensive term,
and it embraces all those practices, whether by word, deed, or writing, which are
calculated
to disturb the tranquillity of the State and lead ignorant persons to endeavour to subvert
the
Government and laws of the country.

 Object: The object of sedition is to induce insurrection - (rising in the first stage or
 incipient rising) and rebellion. It has been described as a disloyalty in action and it leads
to
civil war, bringing into contempt the sovereign or the government or the Constitution.
This
offence, therefore, is the offence of defamation of Government [Niharendu Dutt
Majumdar v. Emperor (1942)].

The substance of Indian Law of sedition is contained in Sections 124A, 153A, 295. While
the Section 124-A deals with political offence of sedition, Section 153-A deals with
sedition by class hatred and Section 295-a deals with sedition by promoting religious
insult.

 Citizen's Criticism and Sedition: Sedition is not an offence against public order, the
gist of the offence is 'incitement to disorder or tendency or likelihood of public disorder
or
the reasonable apprehension thereof', as per the Supreme Court in Kedar Nath v. State of
Bihar [AIR 1962 SC] case.

Moreover, a citizen has a right to say or write whatever he likes about the government; or
its measures, by way of criticism, or comment so long as he does not incite people to
violence.
When he does so and incites people to violence, he loses the constitutional protection of
freedom of speech and freedom is different from licence. It further observed that the
restrictions imposed by these provisions cannot but be said to be in the interest of public
order and within the ambit of permissible legislative interference. The explanations
appended to the main body of section make it clear. It is only when the words used have
the pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder or disturbance of law and
order that the law steps in to prevent such activity in the interest of public order. Section
124-A is a proof of this that the Government can be criticised by all legitimate means and
the State cannot do anything [Kedarnath Case].

 A Reasonable Restriction: No state can be expected to concede freedom to those who

profess to put an end to it by availing of that freedom. Thus, it was held in different cases
that Sedition is a reasonable restriction over the freedom of speech and expression.

 The Person: The writer, printer, publisher, editor and the composer can be a person under
this section. A person who has used the article or writing for such purpose is also
included. A person is liable for everything that appears in his paper and the question of
punishment is a different thing. Because a person is printer, he is not considered to be less
liable. This is however a rebuttable presumption. The essence of this crime is the
intention of the writer, speaker or publisher with which the language is used. The
intention of the writer is to be gathered from the articles written or published. A speech
suggesting generally that the
 government established by law in British India was thoroughly dishonest and unfair and
that steps should be taken either by violence or by threat of violence to abolish I, comes
within the provisions of Section 124-A [Parmanand vs Emperor (AIR 1941 All)].

 Sedition and Political Philosophy: In Manubhai Tribhovandas v State [1970 Guj.],

the question was whether the passages from the book 'extracts from Mao-Tse-Tung'
expound the philosophy of Mao with a view to its academic study or not. The book was
forfeited by the Government. The Gujarat High Court observed that to condemn them as
seditious would be to close the doors of knowledge, to ostracize a work of philosophy
because it challenges values cherished and held dear by our present-day society and holds
up for acceptance a new way of life vastly different from that to which our people are
presently accustomed. It is not for the court to decide which doctrine is good for our
people. It is for the people to choose what is best for them. If any word or writing incites
violence or disturbs law and order or creates public disorder with a view to overthrowing
Government established by law, the State would have power to forfeit the book in order to
prevent disturbance of public tranquillity.
However, here the objected passages which constitute but only six out of 184 passages do
not constitute seditious matter punishable under Section 124A Indian Penal Code. The
order of forfeiture was therefore quashed.

 A threat to Media's Freedom: Sedition is a weapon generally a state uses against the
persons having opposite political thought or those who are propagating against the foreign
rulers and championing the cause of self-rule like that of Indian Independence struggle.
Section 124A defined as an offence, exciting disaffection against the state; it was replaced
with ‘sedition’ in 1898.
After Independence, it was argued before the Supreme Court that Section 124A was ultra
vires of the Constitution insofar as it sought to punish merely bad feelings against a
government, and that it was an unreasonable restriction. The First Amendment to the
Constitution in 1951 incorporated ‘public order’ in Article 19(2) as a ground on which
the state could impose reasonable restrictions by law. Thus, the inclusion of ‘sedition’ was
held constitutional by the Supreme Court in Kedarnath.

In the case of Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab [(1995) SCC], when two officers of the
Punjab Education Department raised the slogan – “Khalistan Zindabad, Raj Karega
Khalsa, ‖” they were convicted of ‘sedition’. But the Supreme Court set it aside saying the
court should look at whether it had led to a consequence detrimental to the nation's unity
and integrity. It pointed out that Section 124A should not be used to violate freedom of
expression. Free speech can be reasonably restricted if that would result in violence or
public disorder. Such an event linked to the relevant communication needed to be proved
before pronouncing a person guilty of sedition, going by this interpretation by the
Supreme Court based on its own judgment in Kedarnath v State of Bihar.

The role of media in communicating the political thoughts adverse to ruling sections
should not be viewed as seditious. Thus, the law of sedition is a threat to freedom of
 airing the views on political thought and making a very bitter criticism of functioning of
the rulers.

MEDIA & OBSCENITY AND INDECENCY

Media is the medium in this technology enhanced century. In this period where
everything is available over gadgets, media is the biggest influencer. When such mediums
or platforms are given this importance, there falls an implied responsibility over them to
supply useful, constructive and truthful information to the people of society. It becomes
the sole responsibility of entertainers to protect the decency and morality of the country
but this platform has been used wrongly.

It is using this wide platform to promote obscenity besides promoting awareness against
one or against any prominent crimes prevailing in society.

Obscenity is a kind of mind pollution and a social problem affecting the society at large.
It can be defined as any picture, photograph, figure, article, write up, video, etc. or a
public act which depraves or corrupts the mind and which appeals to the prurient interests
or which is against the acceptable social moral standards would be called obscene and
vulgar.

Off late, the media has played a major role in promoting obscenity by way of semi-nude
ads, video-graphy, news in the form of soft-porn and much more.

 What is “obscenity”?
Obscenity is a legal term that refers to anything that offends a person's morals. The term
often applies to erotic content in books, magazines, and films, as well as nude dancing. To
explore this concept, consider the following obscenity definition.

Indecency: Indecency includes anything which an ordinary decent man or woman would
find to be shocking disgusting and revolting. Indecency is a wider concept than obscenity.
Anything obscene has to be indecent, but indecency may be something which may not be
obscene always, in the sense of tendency to disgrace and corrupt the reader. For example,
glorification of violence and a criminal may not be offensive and obscene under Section
292 IPC but is still punishable under the Young Persons Harmful Publications Act, 1956,
for not being decent for them. Decency is the ground available under Article 19(2) on
which restrictions can be placed on the freedom of speech and expression.
 Legal Provisions
Various legal provisions including sections, acts and codes have been discussed for
highlighting Indian scenario against obscenity.

The legal provisions against obscenity are as follows:

1) Indian Constitution, 1950
Article 19 provides the freedom of speech and expression. Media is the biggest example
of enjoying this freedom. Not only the human nature but it is the demand of the society
in order to be a civilized society that the State should impose certain reasonable
restrictions on this particular guaranteed Constitutional right and that restriction has been
provided under Article 19(2). One of the limitations imposed on such freedom is
“decency and morality”. As conferred earlier that obscenity is defined as against
decency and morality. Therefore, obscene acts shall be prohibited as against such
restrictions imposed under Indian Constitution.

2) Indian Penal Code, 1980

Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, laid down three tests to understand the term
obscenity which are as follows:
A book, pamphlet, paper, writing etc., shall be deemed to be obscene if it is:
i. lascivious; or
ii. appeals to the prurient interest; or
iii. if its effect or where it is more than one item, the effect of any one of the items, if
taken as a whole, is such as to rend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely,
having regard to all the relevant circumstances to read, see or hear it.
If all the above conditions are fulfilled then the matter would be considered as obscene
and the same would be punishable under law.

3) Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995

This act prohibits the transmission of advertisements on the cable network which are not
in conformity with the Advertisement Code. The Advertisement Code is set out under
Rule 7 of the Cable Television Network Rules, 1994. Contravention of these provisions
attracts liabilities. The Advertisement Code states that no advertisement shall be
permitted which derides any race, caste, colour, creed and nationality.

4) The Information Technology Act, 2000

This particular act has been brought about aims to facilitate the development of a secure
regulatory environment for electronic commerce. Thus while, it is admittedly a statute
leaning towards regulation of commercial activities, it has several provisions, which refer
to penalties and offences. The legislators very clearly intend this to be the fundamental
umbrella legislation to govern computer- related activity in India.

There is a separate chapter for Offences and for the purposes of this paper the most
important provision is Section 67 which is as follows:
 “Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published in the electronic form, any
material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to
tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant
circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be
punished.”

5) The Cable Television Network Act, 1995

This act clearly mentions that 24 hours NO ADULT programme can be shown on
television.

6) The Indecent Representation of Women [Prohibition] Act, 1986

This act states that depiction of the figure, body, or any part of a woman's body, which is
denigrating women or likely to corrupt Public Morality is a punishable offence. The Act
punishes the indecent representation of Women, which means the depiction in any manner
of the figure of a woman; her form or body or any part thereof in such way as to have the
effect of being indecent, or derogatory to, or denigrating women, or is likely to deprave,
corrupt or injure the public morality or morals.

 Tests for Obscenity

I) Hicklin test
The Hicklin's test was laid down in English law in the case of- Regina v. Hicklin. On
Application of Hicklin's test, a publication can be judged for obscenity based on the
isolated part of the work considered out of the context. While applying Hicklin's test the
work is taken out of the whole context of the work and then it is seen that if that work is
creating any apparent influence on most susceptible readers, such as children or weak-
minded adults.
II) Roth Test
In 1957, a new test was developed by US courts to judge obscenity in case of- Roth v.
United States, in this case it was held that only those sex-related materials which had the
tendency of exciting lustful thoughts were found to be obscene and the same has to be
judged from the point of view of an average person by applying contemporary
community standards. This test was sharper and narrower than the Hicklin's test as it does
not isolate the alleged content but limits itself to the dominant theme of the whole
material and checks whether, if taken as a whole, it has any redeeming social value or not.

 Indian Courts on Obscenity

Indian Judiciary for the first-time defined obscenity in the case of- Ranjit D. Udeshi v.
The State of Maharashtra [AIR 1965 SC]. In this case Hon'ble Supreme Court
observed that the test of obscenity is, whether the tendency of the matter charged as
obscene is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to immoral influences, but
the test of obscenity must agree with the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed
under our Constitution. Therefore, sex and nudity in art and literature cannot be regarded
as evidence of obscenity without something more.
 The Court went on to admit that obscenity has been understood in the following terms:
1. That which depraves and corrupts those whose minds are open to such immoral
influences.
2. That which suggests thoughts of a most impure and libidinous character.
3. That which is hard-core pornography.
4. That which has a substantial tendency to corrupt by arousing lustful desires. That
which tends to arouse sexually impure thoughts.
5. That which passes the permissive limits judged of from our community standards.
In this case the Hicklin test was applied and given due regard by the court to judge
obscenity. After this case Hicklin test was continuously liberalized and applied.

In another such case, K.A. Abbas v. Union of India and Anr.[AIR 1971 SC], the
Hon'ble Supreme Court validated the pre-censorship of content as exception to the right
to freedom of speech and expression. However, the court observed that:
“The censors need to take into account the value of art while making their decision. The
artistic appeal or presentation of an episode robs it of its vulgarity and harm and also what
may be socially good and useful and what may not.”

The Supreme Court in case of- Bobby Art International & Ors. v. Ompal Singh Hoon
[AIR 1996 SC] while dealing with the question of obscenity in the context of film called
Bandit Queen, ruled that the scenes depicting must not be scene in isolation. Hon'ble
court said that the so-called objectionable scenes in the film have to be considered in the
context of the whole film and with the context that film is seeking to transmit in respect
of society.

In case of- Director General, Directorate General of Doordarshan & Others v. Anand
Patwardhan & Anr. [AIR 2006 SC], an independent filmmaker challenged
doordarshan's refusal to telecast his documentary, giving reason that it contains scenes
that could promote violence and it's telecast would be against the policies of doordarshan.
The court held that tough, there are some scenes of violence and social injustices in the
film but because of this it cannot be said that the filmmaker supports any of that, and this
depiction is only meant to convey that such social evils still exist.
The Court also held that a documentary couldn’t be denied exhibition on Doordarshan
simply on account of its "A" or "UA" certification. the Court held that a film must be
judged from an average, healthy and common-sense point of view.

In the recent land mark judgment of- Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal [AIR 2014
SC], Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with the issue of obscenity finally
disapproved the Hicklin's test and adopted the Roth test. The issue was revolving around
a picture which was alleged to be obscene in nature. Quashing the prosecution, the Court
held that nudity per se would not be obscene and pictures would have to be examined in
the context in which they were published.

 Indecent Portrayal of Women by Media

 It is observed that in recent time media is representing women in an indecent way. Media
has emerged as a major exploiter of women. It is seen to flout all norms relating to
obscenity, decency and morality. There is a systematic overdose of nudity and vulgarity.
In the media industry, women are treated as goods to promote sales. Women and their
concerns or problems are no longer visible in mass media, there has been increasing
commodification of women in mass media. Many games and gaming websites in India
include content which may be categorized as objectionable under the pornographic and
obscenity laws of India. For instance, some of the popular websites offer games which
have animated caricatures of human beings, including women, depicted in a manner
which may be construed as an offence as per the moral standards of India.

MEDIA & COMMUNAL HARMONY

Media plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion and influencing communal harmony
in India. Communal harmony refers to the peaceful coexistence and understanding among
different religious and cultural communities. In a diverse and pluralistic country like
India, where multiple religions, languages, and cultures coexist, maintaining communal
harmony is of utmost importance.

The relationship between media and communal harmony in India is complex and
multifaceted, with both positive and negative implications. Here's a breakdown of the key
aspects:

 Positive role of media:

i. Promoting understanding and respect: Media can showcase the diverse cultures,
traditions, and perspectives of different communities, fostering empathy and a sense
of shared identity.
ii. Fact-checking and debunking misinformation: By providing accurate and unbiased
information, media can counter false narratives and propaganda that often fuel
communal tensions.
iii. Facilitating dialogue and reconciliation: Media platforms can create spaces for open
discussions and constructive criticisms, bridging divides and promoting peaceful
conflict resolution.
iv. Highlighting issues and injustices: Media can give voice to marginalized
communities and expose discriminatory practices, putting pressure on authorities to
address underlying issues that contribute to communal discord.

 Negative role of media:

i. Sensationalizing and amplifying conflict: Overemphasizing negative events or
focusing on inflammatory rhetoric can exacerbate existing tensions and incite
violence.
ii. Stereotyping and creating "othering": Biased reporting or inaccurate representations
of communities can reinforce negative stereotypes and fuel prejudice.
 iii. Promoting polarization and echo chambers: Algorithmic filters and partisan news
outlets can create closed information ecosystems where individuals are exposed only
to confirmation bias, further entrenching existing divides.
iv. Spreading misinformation and hate speech: Unregulated social media platforms can
be breeding grounds for hate speech and the dissemination of false information that
can trigger communal violence.

 Constitutional & Legal Provisions related to media and communal harmony:

 Constitutional Provisions:
i. Preamble: The Preamble of the Indian Constitution upholds the values of
"fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of
the Nation."
ii. Article 19(1)(a): Guarantees freedom of speech and expression, but subject to
reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order, decency, morality, and
communal harmony.
iii. Article 25: Protects the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess,
practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and other
fundamental rights.
iv. Article 26: Grants religious denominations the right to establish and maintain
institutions for religious and charitable purposes, manage their affairs in matters
of religion, and own property.
v. Article 51A(e): Imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen to promote
harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood among all people of India,
transcending religious, linguistic, and regional or sectional diversities.

 Statutory Provisions:
i. Indian Penal Code (IPC):
1. Sections 153A and 153B: Prohibit acts that promote enmity between
different groups on grounds of religion, race, language, etc., and imputations,
assertions prejudicial to national integration.
2. Section 295A: Outlaws deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage
religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.
3. Section 505(1)(c): Criminalizes publishing or circulating statements that
create or promote enmity, hatred, or ill-will between classes.

ii. Information Technology Act, 2000:

1. Section 66A (struck down in 2015): Previously prohibited sending offensive
messages through communication services.
2. Section 69A: Empowers the government to block online content in the
interest of public order or to prevent incitement to the commission of an
offense.

iii. The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995:

 Prohibits transmission of content that is likely to encourage or incite violence or
promote communal disharmony.

iv. The Press Council of India Act, 1978:

Establishes the Press Council of India to safeguard press freedom and maintain
high standards of journalistic ethics, including a code of conduct that addresses
communal harmony.

 Additional Considerations:
1. Judicial Interpretations: The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in
interpreting the scope of these provisions and balancing freedom of expression
with the need to maintain communal harmony.
2. Self-Regulation by Media: Media organizations have also adopted self-regulatory
codes of conduct to promote responsible reporting and avoid incitement to
violence or hatred.

 Case laws in India relating to media and communal harmony:

1. A.D. Mani v. State of Kerala (AIR 1985 SC): This landmark case laid down
the "Chilling Effect" doctrine, emphasizing that overly broad restrictions on
speech to maintain public order can stifle legitimate dissent and criticism.
2. Ramji Lal Modi v. State of U.P. (AIR 1985 SC): Held that speech targeting a
specific sect or community with the intention of causing harm or inciting
violence would be punishable under Section 153A of the IPC.
3. Secretary, Ministry of I&B v. Tarun Tej Singh (AIR 1995 SC): Upheld the
government's power to prohibit transmission of programs "likely to encourage
or incite violence or promote communal disharmony" under the Cable
Television Networks Act.
4. Prafulla Kumar Bose v. State of West Bengal (AIR 1994 SC): Emphasized
the role of media in promoting national integration and social harmony, stating
that freedom of the press is not absolute and comes with responsibility.
5. Soumen Ghosh v. State of West Bengal (AIR 2005 SC): Recognized the
chilling effect of overbroad gag orders imposed on media during times of
unrest.
6. Saroj Rani Chawla v. State of Delhi (2006): Delhi High Court upheld the
conviction of a newspaper editor for publishing inflammatory content
promoting communal tension.

Overall, the media landscape in India has the potential to both promote and undermine
communal harmony. By promoting responsible journalism, fostering critical thinking skills,
and fostering open communication, media can play a crucial role in building a more peaceful
and inclusive society.

MEDIA & INSULTS TO NATIONAL HONOUR

 The relationship between media and insults to national honour in India is complex, involving
considerations of freedom of expression, responsibility, accountability, and the broader
impact of media on public opinion and national interests. Striking a balance between these
factors remains a dynamic and evolving challenge.

In India, the relationship between media and national honour is complex and multifaceted.
Here are some key aspects to consider:
i. Freedom of Expression: India has a strong tradition of freedom of expression enshrined
in its Constitution. This allows media to criticize the government, public figures, and even
aspects of national identity. However, this freedom is not absolute.
ii. National Security and Public Order: Certain restrictions on speech exist in the interest
of national security and public order. For instance, inciting violence or hatred against
specific groups can be punishable offenses. Additionally, laws like the Prevention of
Insults to National Honour Act (1971) criminalize acts deemed to insult the Indian nation
or its symbols.
iii. Public Perception and Sensitivity: National honour is often a subjective concept, and
what constitutes an insult can vary depending on individual and group perspectives.
Certain media portrayals or criticisms, even if not legally problematic, can evoke strong
reactions from sections of the public who feel their national pride has been hurt.
iv. Constructive Criticism and Debate: Open and respectful debate about national issues,
including criticisms of government policies or societal shortcomings, can contribute to
positive change and strengthen national identity. However, when such discussions
descend into personal attacks, harmful stereotypes, or inflammatory rhetoric, they can
harm social harmony and undermine national unity.
v. Navigating the Balance: Striking a balance between freedom of expression, national
security concerns, and public sensitivities is a delicate task. The media has a
responsibility to report responsibly and avoid sensationalism or deliberate provocation.
The public, in turn, should engage in critical thinking, avoid knee-jerk reactions, and
respect diverse viewpoints.
vi. Responsibility and Accountability: While freedom of the press is a fundamental right, it
comes with the responsibility to report accurately and ethically. Media organizations are
expected to exercise caution and avoid disseminating content that could be perceived as
insulting to national honour. There are legal provisions in place to hold media accountable
for content that violates laws related to sedition, defamation, or incitement of communal
disharmony.
vii. Censorship and Self-censorship: In some instances, concerns about insults to national
honor may lead to calls for censorship. Authorities may seek to regulate or restrict certain
types of content that they believe could be detrimental to national interests. Additionally,
media organizations may practice self-censorship to avoid legal repercussions or public
backlash.

 Constitutional & Legal Provisions regarding media and insults to national honour:
Constitution of India:
 a) Article 19(1)(a): Guarantees freedom of speech and expression. This right allows
media to express and publish opinions, criticisms, and dissent, even if they might be
critical of national policies or figures.
b) Article 19(2): Imposes reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech based on
grounds like national security, public order, decency and morality, and contempt of
court. This allows the government to restrict publications or broadcasts that incite
violence, hatred, or disrespect towards national symbols or institutions.
c) Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. This can come into play
when considering potential punishments for offenses related to national honor,
ensuring adherence to due process and proportionality.
d) Article 51-A (1): of the Constitution of India simultaneously lays down that citizens
are duty-bound 'to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the
National Flag and the National Anthem.'

Legal Provisions:
a) Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971: Prohibits desecration or insult
to national symbols like the flag, anthem, constitution, and map. Violations can lead
to imprisonment and fines.
b) Indian Penal Code (IPC): Contains various sections that can be applied to speech or
publications deemed harmful to national security, public order, or individual
reputation. These include:
1. Section 124A: Sedition (inciting disaffection against the government)
2. Section 153A: Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion,
race, etc.
3. Section 295A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings

 The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971:

Object: to prevent insults to national honour.
Section 2: Section 2 of The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1957 provides
about insults to Indian National Flag and Constitution of India and consequently, makes
the 'burning, mutilation, defacing, defiling, disfiguring, destroying, trampling upon or
[otherwise showing disrespect to or bringing] into contempt (whether by words, either
spoken or written, or by acts) the Indian National Flag or the Constitution of India or any
part thereof, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years, or with fine, or with both.
Explanation 1 exempts any comments or criticism that are made with a view to obtaining
an amendment of the Constitution or alteration of the Flag.
The explanation 2 to the provision clarified that the term 'Indian National Flag' includes
'any pictorial representation thereof'.
Explanation 3 expresses what "public place" occurring in Section 2 is.
Explanation 4 analyses what disrespect to the Indian National Flag means and includes.
 The Flag Code of India, 2002:
Subsequently, the Flag Code of India, 2002 was brought into force as an attempt to bring
together the provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act,
1950 and the Act of 1971, and 'all such laws, conventions practices and instructions'
issued by the Government from time to time with respect to the display of the National
Flag and the manner thereof.

Clause 2.1. of Section I of the Code provides that "There shall be no restriction on the
display of the National Flag by members of the general public, private organisations,
educational institutions etc., except to the extent provided in the Emblems and Names
(Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and the Prevention of Insults to National Honour
Act, 1971 and any other law enacted on the subject."

The Code, however, does not have the force of a statute and is not 'law' under Article 13
(3)(1) of the Constitution of India as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in- "Union of
India Vs. Naveen Jindal & Anr.", 2004 SCC. It contains a set of procedures and
parameters to be followed while using the Flag.

A comprehensive reading of the provisions extracted herein above would show that the
Act seeks to lay a reasonable restriction over the fundamental right to expression
guaranteed by the Constitution of India under Article 19 of Constitution of India by laying
down the parameters that would circumscribe certain overt acts to be beyond such
threshold, moving into the realm of causing deliberate insult to the National Flag, the
Constitution and emblems thereof. It further provides for the proprieties to be observed
while displaying the National Flag.

 Case Laws:
Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India (2016): The Supreme Court mandated the
playing of the national anthem before the screening of films in cinema halls, aiming to
foster patriotism and respect for national symbols. However, this decision has been
criticized by some for potentially infringing on freedom of expression and individual
choice.
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962): The Supreme Court upheld the
constitutional validity of Section 124A (sedition) but narrowed its scope, stating that
criticism of the government or its policies does not constitute sedition unless it incites
violence or public disorder.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A
of the Information Technology Act, which had been used to curb online speech deemed
offensive or menacing. The Court affirmed that freedom of expression on the internet is
protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1985): The
Supreme Court upheld the right of the press to publish information about government
 activities, even if it may be embarrassing or inconvenient for the government. This ruling
emphasized the media's role as a watchdog in a democratic society.
S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989): The Supreme Court stated that the State
cannot prevent open discussion on any matter of public importance, even if it involves
sensitive issues or criticism of the government. This ruling underlined the importance of
open debate and dissent in a democratic society.
Subramanian Swamy v. State of Maharashtra (2014): Ruled that criticizing historical
figures doesn't necessarily insult national honor.
Amnesty International India v. Union of India (2018): Voiced concerns about broad
interpretations of PINHA potentially chilling free speech.

MEDIA & INDECENT REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN

In recent years it has been observed that the media has emerged in a big way as the major
exploiter of woman, with changing times new ways of expression social power have been
fashioned which target the weaker components of society. The most vulnerable target are
women. A systematic overdose of nudity and vulgarity is being forced into the brain of
common viewer through Newspapers, Television, Films, Magazines, Hoardings and
posters.
 THE INDECENT REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1986:
Objective: to prohibit indecent representation of women through advertisements or in
publications, writings, paintings, figures or in any other manner and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto. [Preamble to the Indecent Representation of Women
(Prohibition) Act]

Salient Features of The Act:

This act came into force on October 2, 1987.
Section 2: This section of the act deals with the certain definitions like Advertisement,
Distribution, Indecent Representation of Women: section 2(c)
It has been defined as depiction of a women's form, body, or any part in such a manner
which has the effect of being Indecent and derogatory towards women or denigrating
them, and is likely to deprave, corrupt or injure the public morality or order; package,
label, etc.
Section 3: This section of the act particularly deals with prohibition of advertisement
showcasing Indecency of a woman. It states that no person has a right to publish or intend
to publish in future or make arrangements to take part in the publication or exhibition of
any advertisement which may tend to lower down the reputation and dignity of women in
the society or which is indecent according to the social standards.
Section 4: This section of the act directly deals with restricting the production,
distribution, hiring, selling, circulation of any books, pamphlets, paper, slide, films,
 writing, drawing, painting, photograph or figures which contain material that represent or
tend to represent women Indecently or in an obscene manner.
However, there are certain exceptions to this:
a. This section does not apply to the publication of such items which are approved and
justified for public interest and good.
b. If such publication is kept or used with a bona fide intention for religious purposes, such
publication of books and drawings cannot amount to restriction under this section.
c. Any sculptures, paintings, engravings on ancient monuments which comes within the
meaning of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958
does not amount to Indecent Representation.
d. Any temple, or any car which has any publications, drawings, printing and are used for
the conveyance of Idols or kept or used for any religious purposes does not comes under
the ambit of this section.
e. Similarly, production of any films in respect of which the provisions of Part II of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952, have been applied does not amount to Indecent
Representation of Women.
Section 5: This section of the act grants the following powers to any Gazetted officer,
authorised by the State Government for an area under his jurisdiction:
1. With any assistance if required, he may enter and search any place at any reasonable
time, if he has the reason to believe that an offence under this act has been committed
or is being committed.
2. Seize any advertisement or any books, pamphlets, papers, slide films, writings,
drawings, paintings and photographs which he believes to be Indecent and
contravenes the provisions of the act.
3. Examine any record, register, document or any other material object found in any
place and seize the same if he has reasons to believe that it may furnish evidence that
an offence has been committed under this act.
Section 6: This section of the act gives various legal penalties or punishments to any
person who has breached the provisions of section 3 and section 4 shall be punishable as
following:
1. On first conviction he shall be imprisoned for a term which may extend to 2 years and
with a fine which may extend to 2000 rupees.
2. On second conviction he shall be imprisoned for a term of not less than 6 months
which may extend to 5 years and also with a fine of not less than 10,000 which may
extend to 1 lakh rupees.
Section 7: This section of the act deals with any offence which has been committed by a
company, stating that every person who was in charge, at the time when the offence was
committed shall be deemed to be guilty and liable and thus, punished accordingly.
Section 8: This section of the act states that not taking into consideration anything
contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, an offence under this act shall be
bailable and cognizable.
Section 9: This section of the act justifies the actions or acts of the central government,
state government or any gazetted officer under them which are done in good faith, and
exempts them from legal suit, prosecution and other legal proceedings.
 Section 10: This section of the act has granted powers to the central government, by
notification in the Official Gazette to make rules to carry out the provisions of this act.

Ajay Goswami V. Union of India [2005]: It is a relevant case which drew provisions
from the Indian Penal Code, Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act etc to
challenge the obscene content in newspapers.

 Constitution of India:
The Constitution of India is the basic framework for all other persisting laws in the country
and our Constitution has given a lot of importance. The constitution provides for equality.
Article 14 provides for equality before the law. Article 21 of the constitution is the Magna
Carta of Human rights and safeguarding a lot of aspects for the proper livelihood of a person.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India states that no person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to a procedure as established by law. This law has been
interpreted very widely since the case of- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [AIR 1978
SC] and says very clearly that every woman is an individual human being and has a right to
live a dignified human life. Also being a part of the constitutional duties, the constitution
makes sure that under Article 15(3) to make special provisions for safeguarding of women.

In- Francis Coralie v. Union of Territory of Delhi [AIR 1981 SC], it was held that the right
to life means something more than just physical survival and is not confined to protection of
any faculty or limb through which life is enjoyed or the soul communicates with the outside
world, but includes the right to live with human dignity. Women are human beings. So, every
right pertaining to human beings is not alien to women. Women have right to live a dignified
life.

In Chandra Raja Kumari V, Police Commissioner, Hyderabad [1998], it had been held
that right to live includes right to live with human dignity or decency and therefore holding of
beauty contests is repugnant to dignity or decency of women and offends Art. 21 of the
Constitution.

 The Indian Penal Code,1860:

Section 292 of IPC and section 293 very clearly states the punishment for obscene objects or
items and prohibits obscene or objectifying.

 The Information Technology Act, 2000:

Section 67 of the Information Technology Act is the most serious legislative measure against
pornography, the section says that whoever publishes or cause to be published in electronic
form which is obscene and of prurient interest shall be punished. The wordings of sec 67 are
wide enough to cover all perpetrators of pornography.
Section 66 E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, has made violation of ‘bodily
privacy’ as an offence.
 Customs Act, 1962:
Section 11 of the Act provides that Central Government is empowered to put restriction on
the import or export of goods to maintain decency and morality. Under this Act Maximum
Punishment of 2 years can be given. Section 11(2) of the Act provides various grounds on
which the Government can prohibit importation of goods in India. Ground (b) mentioned in
section 11(2) of the Act provides the ground of maintenance of public order and standards of
decency and morality.

 Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995:

The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 prohibits the transmission of
advertisements on the cable network which are not in conformity with the Advertisement
Code. The Cable operator shall ensure that the portrayal of the female form, in programmes
carried in his cable service is tasteful and aesthetic and is with well-established norms of
good taste and decency.

 Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954:

Section 3 of the Act prohibits any person from taking part into publication of any
advertisement referring to any drug in terms that suggest or is calculated to lead the use of the
drug for the maintenance or improvement of the capacity of human being for sexual pleasure.
Hence, this Act prohibits publication of indecent display of material that refers to sexual
activities and has the capacity of offending people and capable of depraving and corrupting
the minds of people who are likely to see, read and hear the matter in question.

 Young Person’s (Harmful Publications) Act, 1956:

Harmful publications mean any books, magazines, pamphlets filled with pictures that portray
women in the wrong light.

 Case Laws:
1. Maya Ram v. Union of India (1986): This landmark case challenged the
constitutionality of a film censorship law based on its arbitrary and vague criteria,
particularly regarding portrayals of women. The Supreme Court emphasized the need
for a balanced approach, upholding both freedom of expression and public decency.
2. Bobby Art International v. Om Prakash Gupta (1995): This case addressed the
issue of objectification and hyper-sexualization in advertising. The Supreme Court
recognized the potential harm of such portrayals and emphasized the need for
advertisements to be socially responsible and respectful of women's dignity.
3. Sachin Dharwadkar v. State of Maharashtra (2018): This case dealt with the
portrayal of violence against women in media. The Court acknowledged the potential
desensitizing effect and cautioned against glorifying or trivializing violence.