Category: Constitutional Law

ISSUE:

Whether the restriction on newsprint import under the 1955 Order was violative of Art. 19(1) (a) of the Constitution?

RULE:

The freedom of the press was an essential element of Article 19(1)(a) and the absence of an express mention of such freedoms as a special category was irrelevant. Free press was to be regarded as an essential element of freedom of expression in general.

ISSUE:

Whether the right of publishing a newspaper and its circulation comes under the right of freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India?

RULE:

While the Indian Constitution does not explicitly guarantee freedom of the press, it is recognized as part of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), which may be restricted on grounds mentioned in Article 19(2). The right to propagate one’s ideas includes the right to publish them, disseminate them, and circulate them.

ISSUE:

Whether Section 9(1-A) of the Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act is constitutionally valid?

RULE:

Unless a law restricting freedom of speech and expression is directed solely against the undermining of the security of the State or the overthrow of it, such a law cannot derive power from Clause 2 of Article 19.

ISSUE:

Whether the film should be issued a U certificate by the censor board?

RULE:

Article 19(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees the right of freedom of expression. Such a right includes the right to freedom of communication of which film is a medium.

Freedom of expression cannot be suppressed on account of threat of demonstration and processions or violence.

ISSUE:

Whether Sections 124A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code are inconsistent with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution?

RULE:

The words “Government established by law” in the disputed sections must be taken to mean the visible symbol of the state.

The feeling of disloyalty to the Government leads to public disorder by the use of actual violence.

Any written or spoken words which have implicit in them the idea of subverting the Government by violent means have been made penal by the sections.

ISSUE:

Whether Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000 (ITA) is constitutionally valid?

RULE:

Mere discussion or even advocacy of a particular cause howsoever unpopular is at the heart of Article 19(1)(a). it is only when such discussion reaches the level of incitement that Article 19(2) kicks in.

Section 66A makes no distinction between mere discussion of a point of view that may be unpopular and incitement by which words lead to a causal connection with public disorder.