-
Freedom of Speech and Expression 1st Landmark Of the Supreme Court in the matter of Romesh Thappar Vs State of Madras and Brij Bhushan Vs State of Punjab propounding the Freedom of Press as guaranteed under Art 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court recognized that freedom of speech and expression includes freedom of propagation of ideas, and that freedom is ensured by the freedom of circulation "Liberty of circulation is as essential to that freedom as the liberty of publication. Indeed, without circulation the publication would be of little value"
IT held that criticism of Government exciting disaffection or bad feelings towards it cannot be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of expression and of the press, unless it is such as to undermine the security or tend to overthrow the State. Thus, very narrow and stringent limits have been set to permissible legislative abridgement of the right of free speech and expression and this was doubtless due to the realization that freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations.
The SC was of opinion that 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 law cannot fall within the reservation under Art. 19(2). It declared the provisions of the Public Safety and Public Order Act void and unconstitutional.These were landmark judgments declaring that the opinions of individual citizens and the views of the press could not be restricted by law on the ground that they were prejudicial to public order as the word public order was not included under Art- 19(2).
It was the first major confrontation between the Citizens and the State and the SC came out decisively in favor of individual freedom and civil liberties. The judgments were widely welcomed as laying the foundation of the freedom of the press and made it clear that criticism of the govt creating disaffection or bad feelings towards it was not to be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of the press unless it was such as to undermine the security of the state. This was a major victory for the citizens that kept the heavy-handed state in check.
It was shortlived as in order to nullify the effects of the said Judgments the 1St Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 was passed amending Art 19(2) by adding more grounds which permitted the curtailment of the Freedom of Speech and Expression. - https://youtu.be/csj_Xliwwdo
- English
- Jeet Bhatt
Freedom of Speech and Expression Romesh Thappar Vs State of Madras Brij Bhushan Vs State of Punjab
Author
Jeet Bhatt
Video Category
Constitutional Law
Language
english
Highlights
Freedom of Speech and Expression 1st Landmark Of the Supreme Court in the matter of Romesh Thappar Vs State of Madras and Brij Bhushan Vs State of Punjab propounding the Freedom of Press as guaranteed under Art 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court recognized that freedom of speech and expression includes freedom of propagation of ideas, and that freedom is ensured by the freedom of circulation "Liberty of circulation is as essential to that freedom as the liberty of publication. Indeed, without circulation the publication would be of little value"
IT held that criticism of Government exciting disaffection or bad feelings towards it cannot be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of expression and of the press, unless it is such as to undermine the security or tend to overthrow the State. Thus, very narrow and stringent limits have been set to permissible legislative abridgement of the right of free speech and expression and this was doubtless due to the realization that freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations.
The SC was of opinion that 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 law cannot fall within the reservation under Art. 19(2). It declared the provisions of the Public Safety and Public Order Act void and unconstitutional.
These were landmark judgments declaring that the opinions of individual citizens and the views of the press could not be restricted by law on the ground that they were prejudicial to public order as the word public order was not included under Art- 19(2).
It was the first major confrontation between the Citizens and the State and the SC came out decisively in favor of individual freedom and civil liberties. The judgments were widely welcomed as laying the foundation of the freedom of the press and made it clear that criticism of the govt creating disaffection or bad feelings towards it was not to be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of the press unless it was such as to undermine the security of the state. This was a major victory for the citizens that kept the heavy-handed state in check.
It was shortlived as in order to nullify the effects of the said Judgments the 1St Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 was passed amending Art 19(2) by adding more grounds which permitted the curtailment of the Freedom of Speech and Expression.
IT held that criticism of Government exciting disaffection or bad feelings towards it cannot be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of expression and of the press, unless it is such as to undermine the security or tend to overthrow the State. Thus, very narrow and stringent limits have been set to permissible legislative abridgement of the right of free speech and expression and this was doubtless due to the realization that freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations.
The SC was of opinion that 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 law cannot fall within the reservation under Art. 19(2). It declared the provisions of the Public Safety and Public Order Act void and unconstitutional.
These were landmark judgments declaring that the opinions of individual citizens and the views of the press could not be restricted by law on the ground that they were prejudicial to public order as the word public order was not included under Art- 19(2).
It was the first major confrontation between the Citizens and the State and the SC came out decisively in favor of individual freedom and civil liberties. The judgments were widely welcomed as laying the foundation of the freedom of the press and made it clear that criticism of the govt creating disaffection or bad feelings towards it was not to be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of the press unless it was such as to undermine the security of the state. This was a major victory for the citizens that kept the heavy-handed state in check.
It was shortlived as in order to nullify the effects of the said Judgments the 1St Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 was passed amending Art 19(2) by adding more grounds which permitted the curtailment of the Freedom of Speech and Expression.