Freedom of Press & Media in India

Freedom of the press is widely regarded as one of the cornerstones of a healthy democracy. In India, the press plays an indispensable role in disseminating information, shaping public discourse, and holding power to account. 

Although the Constitution of India does not expressly mention the “freedom of the press,” this vital liberty is implicitly protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. 

This article provides a detailed analysis of the legal framework, rights, judicial interpretations, and the challenges faced by the Indian press, while also examining the restrictions and the controversial use of sedition laws.

Constitutional and Legal Framework on Freedom of Press in India

The freedom of press in India derives its legitimacy from the broader right to freedom of speech and expression enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, 1950. This article guarantees that every citizen has the right to express themselves through speech, writing, printing, pictures, or any other medium of communication. 

Although the term “press” is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it is considered an integral part of this freedom, allowing media organisations and individual journalists to publish, circulate, and broadcast information.

Article 19(2) of the Constitution, however, provides the State with the power to impose “reasonable restrictions” on this freedom. These restrictions are designed to protect the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency, morality, and also to prevent contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence. The balancing act between safeguarding free expression and imposing restrictions to protect other essential interests has been a subject of extensive judicial deliberation and interpretation.

Rights of the Press in India

The press in India enjoys a spectrum of rights that are essential for the functioning of a free and democratic society. These rights encompass not only the act of publishing information but also the broader right to circulate, advertise, and receive information. The following are the key rights exercised by the media:

Right to Publish and Circulate

At the heart of press freedom lies the right to publish and circulate information. This right is not confined merely to the act of printing news but extends to the decision-making process regarding content, format, and the volume of circulation. 

In landmark cases such as Romesh Thappar v State of Madras (1950) and Bennett Coleman & Co. v Union of India (1972), the Supreme Court underscored that newspapers must be allowed to determine their editorial policies and the extent of their circulation without undue interference from the State. 

The case of Sakal Papers v Union of India (1962) further cemented the notion that any law directly violating the freedom of speech and expression would be unconstitutional.

Right to Receive Information

Freedom of the press also entails the right to receive information. This is crucial for the press to perform its watchdog role effectively. The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 empowers not only journalists but every citizen to request and obtain information from public authorities. 

Through this mechanism, the press can access vital information regarding government policies, project details, and other administrative matters, thereby promoting transparency and accountability in public life.

Right to Conduct Interviews

Another important facet of press freedom is the right to conduct interviews. While this right is subject to the consent of the interviewee, it is nonetheless critical in enabling the media to seek firsthand accounts and present diverse perspectives to the public. 

In cases such as Prabha Dutt v Union of India (1982) and State v Charulata Joshi (1999), the Supreme Court clarified that the press does not possess an absolute right to conduct interviews, especially in sensitive situations such as interviewing prisoners or undertrial inmates. Consent, however, remains the key determinant in such instances.

Right to Report Court Proceedings

The press has the right to attend and report on court proceedings, a practice essential for maintaining transparency in the judiciary. Nonetheless, this right is balanced by the court’s power to hold “in camera” proceedings when necessary to safeguard the interests of justice. 

The case of Naresh Shridhar v State of Maharashtra (1967) clarified that courts could restrict public access to sensitive proceedings if open reporting would jeopardise the fairness of the trial. 

Furthermore, in Sahara Real Estate v SEBI (2012), the Supreme Court permitted temporary postponements of reportage in the interest of justice. Reporting on legislative proceedings is similarly protected under the Parliamentary Proceedings (Protection of Publication) Act, 1977.

Right to Advertise

Commercial speech, which includes advertising, is also encompassed within the ambit of freedom of speech and expression. The right to advertise is crucial for the economic viability of media organisations. 

In Tata Press Ltd v MTNL (1995) and Hindustan Times v State of UP (2003), the courts recognised the pivotal role of advertisements in sustaining newspapers, emphasising that any undue curtailment of this right would adversely affect the circulation and financial stability of the media. 

The decision in Sakal Papers v Union of India (1962) further reiterated that restrictions on advertisements would constitute an infringement of the press’s fundamental rights.

Landmark Judgements on Freedom of Press in India

Over the decades, the judiciary has played a seminal role in delineating the contours of press freedom in India. A series of landmark judgements have not only reinforced the rights of the press but also highlighted the necessity of a free media for the proper functioning of democracy.

In the landmark case of Romesh Thappar v State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court established that freedom of the press is foundational to democratic governance. The judgement recognised that any attempt to curb the press’s ability to circulate information would undermine the democratic process. Similarly, the judgement in Bennett Coleman & Co. v Union of India (1972) underscored that editorial independence, including the discretion to determine circulation, is a vital component of press freedom.

The case of Sakal Papers v Union of India (1962) is particularly significant as it set a precedent by declaring that laws which directly impede the freedom of speech and expression are unconstitutional. These judgements collectively affirm that while the press enjoys broad freedoms under the Constitution, these freedoms are not absolute and must be exercised within the ambit of reasonable restrictions as prescribed under Article 19(2).

Judicial interpretations have further extended the understanding of press freedom to include the right to receive information. The Supreme Court has reiterated the importance of transparency in governance by upholding the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in various contexts – ranging from electoral transparency to access to critical public information. Such decisions underscore the symbiotic relationship between a free press and the public’s right to know.

Moreover, the courts have also dealt with the delicate issue of the right to dissent and the use of sedition laws. In recognising that robust criticism of the government is an inherent aspect of free speech, the judiciary has clarified that strong, dissenting opinions do not automatically amount to sedition. Instead, the courts have set a high threshold for what constitutes an act of sedition, thereby protecting the right to dissent while maintaining public order.

Restrictions, Limitations and the Use of Sedition Law

Despite the robust protections afforded by the Constitution, the freedom of the press in India is not without its limitations. Article 19(2) of the Constitution permits the imposition of reasonable restrictions on the exercise of free speech and expression. These restrictions are aimed at protecting the interests of the State, including national security, public order, decency, and morality, as well as preventing defamation, contempt of court, and incitement to violence.

One of the most contentious aspects of these restrictions is the application of the sedition law under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Sedition law has historically been used to curb dissent and restrict the press from criticising government policies. 

The law criminalises acts that bring hatred or contempt against the government or incite disaffection among the public. However, the judiciary has consistently emphasised that criticism, even if vehement, does not equate to sedition unless it incites violence or public disorder.

Judgements have clarified that for an act to be deemed seditious, it must go beyond mere expression of dissent and result in a tangible threat to public order. As such, the misuse of sedition law to stifle free expression has been a matter of significant concern among legal scholars and human rights activists. 

While the State may invoke sedition laws in exceptional circumstances, it is imperative that these provisions are applied judiciously, ensuring that the fundamental right to free speech is not unduly compromised.

The ongoing debate surrounding sedition highlights the need for a balanced approach that protects national interests without encroaching upon the rights of the press. In recent times, there have been calls for the reform of sedition laws to prevent their arbitrary application, thereby reinforcing the commitment to upholding press freedom in a democratic society.

Conclusion

The freedom of the press in India is a vital pillar of its democratic system, serving as both a conduit for the dissemination of information and a guardian of public accountability. Rooted in the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, the press enjoys a broad range of rights – from publishing and circulating information to conducting interviews, reporting court proceedings, and even advertising.

Landmark judicial judgements have played a critical role in defining and protecting these rights, underscoring the indispensable role of a free media in a vibrant democracy.

Researcher: Aparna Verma (Pt. Motilal Nehru Law College)

Author: Aishwarya Agrawal