School of Law and Governance

A PROJECT ASSIGNMENT ON THE

CASE OF
Ajay Goswami vs Union Of India

B.A.LL.B

Under the supervision of

Dr. Poonam Kumari
Assistant Professor
SLG, CUSB

Session- 2022-27

Sumitted by:Priyanshu Kumar

B.A.LLB(Hons),Semester-2nd
Sub: Constitution-1
Enrollment No-CUSB2213125071
Section-A
Acknowledgement

It is a great pleasure to express my deep sense of thanks and gratitude to my course instructor and
guide Dr.Poonam Kumari . Her dedication and her keen interest above all and her overwhelming
attitude to help her students had been solely and mainly responsible for completing my work. Her
scholarly and timely advice, meticulous scrutiny and her logical approach has helped me to a very
great extent to accomplish my project in an excellent manner

I owe a deep sense of gratitude to Dr. S.P. Srivastava, Dean of school of law and governance,
C.U.S.B, for making sure that we are provided with best facilities and surroundings to fetch the best
out of ourselves. His prompt inspirations, timely suggestions with kindness and enthusiasm and
dynamism have also enable me to complete my project on time. It is my great privilege to thanks my
parents for their constant encouragement throughout my research period. –

Thank You -Priyanshu Kumar

 Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………..

→ Introduction………………………………………………………………

→ Analysis of the fact of the case ………………………………………….

→ Issue of the case ………………………………………………………….

→ Related Article of the Indian Constitution …………………………….

→ Judgement/Decison of the case…………………………………………..

→ Refered Judgment…………………………………………………………

→ Conclusion…………………………………………………………………

→ Bibliography……………………………………………………………….
 Abstract

Petitioner Ajay Goswami filed an appeal before the Supreme Court of India, asking the
Court to help his proposal to protect children from sexually exploitative literature. He
suggested that the administration issue a legal notice to all newspapers about sexually
explicit material that may not be acceptable to children, and that if the newspapers
contain such material, their authenticity must be strong warning on the front page. In
another option, the petitioner suggested creating a panel of experts to propose available
resources for targeting young children to sexual exploitation materials in newspapers.
But the Supreme Court of India rejected the appeal.

Introduction

The applicant applied to the court for an injunction that the sexual assault trial should
not be published in the newspaper as it was equally dangerous to the children. He added
that the right to freedom of the press should not be limited to the right of children to
education and protection. It meant that such information on paper would harm the
psychological well-being of the child and fill the mind of the child with harmful
thoughts Article 21 of the Constitution provides for the right to education and the
exercise of the same shall not constitute unfair practices in the way of association. Such
issues are a barrier to effective children’s education. He asked for detailed guidelines
for news organizations on what they can and cannot publish. Also, make sure their
content is accurate and what content is inappropriate for children or requires supervision
by a parent teacher. Newspapers carrying such information will be edited separately
and an advertisement will be placed on the front page stating its status as this enables
parents to decide whether or not to buy the paper or to allow their children let them
read.
Analysis of the fact of the case

The applicant applied to the court for an injunction that the sexual assault trial should
not be published in the newspaper as it was equally dangerous to the children. He added
that the right to freedom of the press should not be limited to the right of children to
education and protection. It meant that such information on paper would harm the
psychological well-being of the child and fill the mind of the child with harmful
thoughts Article 21 of the Constitution provides for the right to education and the
exercise of the same shall not constitute unfair practices in the way of association. Such
issues are a barrier to effective children’s education. He asked for detailed guidelines
for news organizations on what they can and cannot publish. Also, make sure their
content is accurate and what content is inappropriate for children or requires supervision
by a parent teacher. Newspapers carrying such information will be edited separately
and an advertisement will be placed on the front page stating its status as this enables
parents to decide whether or not to buy the paper or to allow their children let them
read.

Issue of the case

1. Whether Mr. Goswami can get the case investigated by authority of his preference?
2. Whether the Courts can consolidate the various similar FIRs under Article 32?
3. Whether the statements made by Mr. Goswami on live television are protected by Article
19(1)(a) or can be limited by the restrictions of Article 19(2)?
Related Article of the Indian Constitution

Article 19 (1)(a)

The concept of this basic right under Article 19(1)(a) is dynamic, as the content of speech and
expression, as well as the means through which it is communicated, has evolved over time and
with technological advancements. It encompasses the freedom of expression and the right to
propagate or publish one’s opinions through any medium, including newspapers, magazines, and
films, as well as electronic and audio-visual media.

Article 19 (1) (a) says that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression
But this right is subject to limitations imposed under Art. 19(2) which empowers the state to put
to reasonable restrictions on the following grounds: 1. Security of the state 2. Friendly relations
with foreign states 3. Public order; decency and morality 4. Contempt of court 5. Defamation 6.
Incitement to offence 7. Sovereignty and Integrity of the state
Judgement/Decison of the case

In accordance to Press Council Act, 1978 and Section 292 of the IPC the news paper
agencies are already prohibited from printing obscene materials. Further, it held that
there was insufficient evidence produced for curtailing the freedom of speech and
expression enshrined under Article 19 of the Constitution.
Replying to the question of putting a blanket ban on the same, the court replied that in
such a scenario, the news paper shall only consist of things which would cater to the
children and not adults. Regulations to control are already in place and thus the petition
was dismissed.
Refered Judgments

Rajagopal V. State of Tamilnadu

In Rajagopal V. State of Tamilnadu .held that the press have the right to have publish an unauthorized
account of citizen‟s life (autobiography of a convict accused of several murders case) in so far as it is
based upon public records. Freedom of the press, the court said, means absence of interference by the
State except insofar as it is authorized by the Constitution and by-laws.

Union of India V. Association for Democratic Reforms

In Union of India V. Association for Democratic Reforms it was held that the voter‟s right to know
antecedents including the criminal past of a candidate to membership of parliament of legislative
assembly is a fundamental right covered under Art.19(1)(a). The apex court observed: “The right to
get information is recognized all throughout and it is a natural right flowing from the concept of
democracy. The people of the country have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in
a public way by the public functionaries”20 . MP‟s and MLA‟s are undoubtedly public functionaries.

Harish Uppal V. UOI

In Harish Uppal V. UOI a constitutional bench of Supreme Court categorically pronounced that the
lawyers had no right to go on strike or give a call for boycott, not even a token strike. It has been
suggested that the advocates can get redressal of their grievances by passing resolutions, making
representations and taking out silent processions, holding dharnas or to resort to relay fast, having
discussion by giving T.V. interviews and press statements.

The Secretary, Ministry of I &B V. Cricket Association, Bengal with Cricket

Association, Bengal V. Union of India

The Secretary, Ministry of I &B V. Cricket Association, Bengal with Cricket Association, Bengal V.
Union of India is a landmark judgment as is recognises the right to information as part of fundamental
right to speech and expression under Art. 19(1) (a). The court observed that a citizen has a
fundamental right to use the best means of imparting and receiving information through electronic
media. Albeit with a caveat: the airwaves are a public resource and must, therefore, be regulated in the
public interest. The court ruled that the freedom and expression includes the “right to educate, inform
and entertain. Sport is an expression of self.”18 The government can impose restriction on such a
right only on the grounds specified in Art.19 (2). State monopoly on electronic media is not
mentioned in Art.19 (2)
Conclusion
In my view the Judgement of the Apex court (Supreme court) was not wrong although
it is necessary that publication must be judged as a whole and news items,
advertisements or passages should not be read without the accompanying message that
is purported to be conveyed to the public. Also the members of the public and readers
should not look for meanings in a picture or written article, which is not conceived to
be conveyed through the picture or the news itemThe word indecency is widely used to
refer to utterances (words, images, activities) which denigrate the sexually strong nature
of the principal under normal circumstances and then again the Constitution of India
ensures that everyone the resident gets a chance to make a speech and make statements.
This will equally cover someone who goes through any topic. This is hardly a privilege,
however, if such speech and disclosures are highly invasive and would seriously abuse
the ethical guidelines of society as a whole The term is a slang term for utterances
(words, images, activities) that insult the fundamentally strong characteristics of
sexuality in a normal context and then again the Constitution of India ensures that every
resident has a chance if to speak and speak freely. This opportunity will help anyone
with any issue. However, this is not a privilege at all, if speech and expression are highly
fragile and would seriously abuse the moral guidelines of society as a whole and any
speech is therefore subject to sensitive constraints. Freedom of expression has
contributed greatly to events and the success of our free nation. In my view, any method
of excluding the distribution of certain information or images puts a shackle on the
freedom of the free press, which is one of the characteristics of our due process. The
interventions of law and the suggestions made by the appellants have been resolved
without any doubt that the present appeal may be dismissed as the appellant has lost his
sight to establish the requirements and preconditions for the establishment of the right
to freedom of speech and expression. Times of India and Hindustan Times are
newspapers in Delhi with a wide patron base from all walks of life. Clearly
demonstrated through scholarly insights on key papers.
Bibliography

Websites
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/561137/
https://www.legalserviceindia.com
https://lawvedic.com/judgement_listing/ajay-goswami-vs-union-of-india-ors/
https://www.ejusticeindia.com/case-summary-ajay-goswami-v-union-of-india/

Books
→ Seervai. H.M., “Constitutional Law of India”, 4th Edition, Universal Law Publishing Co.,
Pvt., Ltd, Delhi, 2010, vol. 1

→ Granville Austine, “The Indian Constitution - Cornerstone of a Nation” 7th Edition,

Oxford University Press, New Delhi

Refered cases

→ Rajagopal V. State of Tamil Nadu; (1994) 6 SCC 632

→ Union of India V. Association of Democratic Reforms; AIR 2002 SC 2112

→ Harish Uppal V. Union of India;AIR 2003 SC 739

→ Secretary, Ministry of I &B V. Cricket Association, Bengal with Cricket Association,

Bengal V. Union of India; AIR 1995 SC 1236