EXAM NOTES FOR SECOND SEMESTER EXAMINATIONS 2024

(MASS MEDIA LAWS)

GOVT CONTROL ON TELEVISION AND RADIO

Media in India is mostly self-regulated. The existing bodies for regulation of media such as the Press
Council of India which is a statutory body and the News Broadcasting Standards Authority, a self-
regulatory organization, issue standards which are more in the nature of guidelines. Recently, the
Chairman of the Press Council of India, former Justice of the Supreme Court, Mr. M. Katju,
has argued that television and radio need to be brought within the scope of the Press Council of India
or a similar regulatory body. We discuss the present model of regulation of different forms of media.
This note was first published at Rediff. 1. What is the Press Council of India (PCI)? The PCI was
established under the PCI Act of 1978 for the purpose of preserving the freedom of the press and of
maintaining and improving the standards of newspapers and news agencies in India. 2. What is the
composition of the PCI and who appoints the members? The PCI consists of a chairman and 28
other members. The Chairman is selected by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Chairman of the Rajya
Sabha and a member elected by the PCI. The members consist of members of the three Lok Sabha
members, two members of the Rajya Sabha , six editors of newspapers, seven working journalists
other than editors of newspapers, six persons in the business of managing newspapers, one person
who is engaged in the business of managing news agencies, and three persons with special knowledge
of public life. 3. What are its functions? The functions of the PCI include among others (i) helping
newspapers maintain their independence; (ii) build a code of conduct for journalists and news
agencies; (iii) help maintain “high standards of public taste” and foster responsibility among citizens;
and (iv) review developments likely to restrict flow of news. 4. What are its powers? The PCI has the
power to receive complaints of violation of the journalistic ethics, or professional misconduct by an
editor or journalist. The PCI is responsible for enquiring in to complaints received. It may summon
witnesses and take evidence under oath, demand copies of public records to be submitted, even issue
warnings and admonish the newspaper, news agency, editor or journalist. It can even require any
newspaper to publish details of the inquiry. Decisions of the PCI are final and cannot be appealed
before a court of law. 5. What are the limitations on the powers of the PCI? The powers of the
PCI are restricted in two ways. (1) The PCI has limited powers of enforcing the guidelines issued. It
cannot penalize newspapers, news agencies, editors and journalists for violation of the guidelines. (2)
The PCI only overviews the functioning of press media. That is, it can enforce standards upon
newspapers, journals, magazines and other forms of print media. It does not have the power to review
the functioning of the electronic media like radio, television and internet media. 6. Are there other
bodies that review television or radio? For screening films including short films, documentaries,
television shows and advertisements in theaters or broadcasting via television the Central Board of
Film Certification (CBFC) sanction is required. The role of the CBFC is limited to controlling content of
movies and television shows, etc. Unlike the PCI, it does not have the power to issue guidelines in
relation to standards of news and journalistic conduct. Program and Advertisement Codes for
regulating content broadcast on the television, are issued under the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 1995. The District magistrate can seize the equipment of the cable operator in case
he broadcasts programs that violate these Codes. Certain standards have been prescribed for content
accessible over the internet under the IT Rules 2011. However, a regulatory body such as the PCI or
the CBFC does not exist. Complaints are addressed to the internet service provider or the host. Radio
Channels have to follow the same Programme and Advertisement Code as followed by All India Radio.
Private television and radio channels have to conform to conditions which are part of license
agreements. These include standards for broadcast of content. Non-compliance may lead to
suspension or revocation of license. 7. Is there a process of self regulation by television
channels? Today news channels are governed by mechanisms of self-regulation. One such
mechanism has been created by the News Broadcasters Association. The NBA has devised a Code of
Ethics to regulate television content. The News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), of the NBA,
is empowered to warn, admonish, censure, express disapproval and fine the broadcaster a sum upto
Rs. 1 lakh for violation of the Code. Another such organization is the Broadcast Editors’ Association.
The Advertising Standards Council of India has also drawn up guidelines on content of advertisements.
These groups govern through agreements and do not have any statutory powers. 8. Is the
government proposing to create a regulatory agency for television broadcasters? In 2006
the government had prepared a Draft Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006. The Bill made it
mandatory to seek license for broadcasting any television or radio channel or program. It also
provides standards for regulation of content. It is the duty of the body to ensure compliance with
guidelines issued under the Bill.

“The television is unique in a way in which intrudes into our homes. The combination of picture and
voice makes it an irresistibly attractive medium of presentation. It has tremendous appeal and
influence over millions of people. Television is shaping the food habits, cultural values, social mores
and what not of the society in a manner no other medium has done so far….”, said the Supreme court
in a landmark judgement on “airwaves” in the 90’s. The cable TV revolution of the 90’s like all other
revolutions before it presented us with the proverbial “double-edged sword” situation where with the
good, it also brought the bad which had to be checked.

The Need for Regulation

In 2017, the TV-owning homes in India increased from 153.5 million to 183 million. Interestingly, the
number of rural households owning TV is 17 per cent more than urban households. One of the major
reasons attributed to this growth in TV sets is the increasing number of nuclear families without elders
than ever before. Given the low levels of literacy in India in general and rural India in particular, the
excess influence of TV has to be regulated. Unlike the movies, where the demand side i.e. the
audience is filtered before entering into the movie hall, no such mechanism exists in case of
Television, hence there is a need to filter the supply side i.e. the content before it can be transmitted.

How is the content on Television regulated?

Presently, the content on television is regulated in multiple ways which range from statutory regulation
to self-regulation. However, in India, there are on an average two new channels launched every month
and a new show is launched every third day. Also, there are about 800 channels in India across more
than 20 languages. A single monolithic regulatory mechanism is impossible to supervise and regulate
the content of this magnitude. Hence, the content is classified to facilitate better regulation.

How is the content on Television classified?

The content on TV is broadly classified as follows-

 Non-news and Current affairs(entertainment)

 News and Current affairs
 Advertisements
 Films on Television.
Each of the above categories is regulated by statutes and self-regulatory codes supervised by
statutory and self-regulated bodies.
Non-news and Current affairs TV channels
The content or “programs” on these channels are regulated by the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 1995 which consists of a program code and the advertising code which all content
transmitted or retransmitted on television must adhere to. The Program and the advertising codes are
collectively called “codes” and are mentioned in the Cable Television Networks (Rules), 1994.

The Program code largely regulates the content that should be shown on TV which includes content
that may violate various statutes. For example, the program code prohibits airing any content that
may not be suitable for public viewing which may be otherwise prohibited under the Cinematograph
Act, 1952. This code also prevents the airing of content that may be in contravention of prevalent the
public policy such as obscenity, communal disharmony etc.

The Advertising code, on the other hand, regulates the content that can be advertised and prohibits
advertising of those content that is in violation of public morality and decency and any other content
that can create social disharmony etc.

The above codes are enforced by the following bodies-

The Inter-Ministerial Committee(IMC)

This is a committee constituted by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB) and looks into
violations of any of the above codes and reports it to the MIB accordingly for various actions. A case in
point was about NDTV India which was taken off-air by the MIB for a day due to violations of code that
was not followed while reporting the terrorist encounter in Kashmir.

Electronic Media Monitoring Centre(EMMC)

This is another body established by the MIB to monitor the content of various TV channels for any
violations of the above codes or statutes such as the Cable Act etc. The EMMC after finding any
violations reports it to the Inter-ministerial committee for further action.

State-level and District-Level Monitoring Committees

There are monitoring centres established at the district and the state levels. The District level
monitoring committees are authorized to decide on any local content violating the code. In case of
National level content violations, the district level committees may forward the complaints to the IMC
through the state level committees.

All of the above-mentioned bodies are bodies of the state that have been constituted under certain
statutory provisions. However, to ensure the independence of the media, a self-regulating provision
has also been acknowledged by the state. To that end, an Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) has
been formed to form guidelines for regulating all content on TV across all forms of transmission viz
cable, terrestrial, DTH, IPTV etc. The IBF has adopted Self-Regulation Guidelines and Content Code and
Certification Rules, 2011, which are applicable to all non-news broadcast programs on TV. The IBF has
also established a Broadcast Content Complaints Council (BCCC), which receives complaints on any
particular content broadcast on television. The complaint has to be filed with the BCCC within 14 days
of the first broadcast. Apart from this, the BCCC can also initiate suo-moto proceedings against any
particular content broadcast on television.
News and Current Affairs TV channels
These are the most sensitive regulatory topics on TV. Unlike the Press Club of India, which is a
statutory body for regulating newsprint content, there is no statutory regulatory body to regulate
content for the News channels in India. This has been a point of much debate as the news
broadcasters invoke the freedom of fair and free media in a democracy is essential whereas the people
on the other side advocate for some form of regulation as no institution is above law. For the moment,
there is no statutory regulatory mechanism and the News and the Current Affairs TV channels in India
are regulated by a self-regulatory body known as the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) which has
formulated a standards code known as the NBA Code.

The NBA has also laid down news broadcasting standards regulation as an industry standard and also
constituted under it News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) for disputes adjudication and to
enforce the NBA code.

Advertisements
With increasing TV viewership by the day, the Advertisement(Ad) revenue has become a very lucrative
option for all the channels. However, the content of these advertisements has to be monitored. There
is no statutory provision or body to regulate the ad content in India. Hence, a self-governing body
called the Advertising standards council of India (ASCI) has been formed to regulate the ad content in
India. The Asci has prescribed an ASCI code to which all the Ad content in India has to adhere to.

Films on Television
The Cinematograph Act,1952 provides for the establishment of a central Board for Film Certification
(CBFC) which has to certify films for public exhibition. Exhibition of any film without the certificate of
the CBFC is illegal. Based on the content of the films, the CBFC awards a certificate to the films which
range from unrestricted public viewing(“U”) to restricted to adult viewing (“A”). Hence, any film, song
or promo of a film can be aired on TV only after it has been certified by the CBFC for unrestricted
public viewing. Any content awarded an “A” certificate cannot be aired on TV.

State Broadcasting Network- Doordarshan

After the advent of the cable TV and the deluge of the private channels and broadcasters, there is still
a state broadcaster known as the Broadcasting Corporation of India popularly known as the Prashar
Bharathi established under the Prashar Bharthi (PB) Act, 1990. The primary aim of the Prashar Bharthi
is to conduct public broadcasting services to inform, educate and entertain the public and to ensure a
balanced development of broadcasting on TV. The PB Act also provides for the establishment of a
Broadcasting Council to receive any complaints with respect to content aired on these channels.

REGULATIONS IN RADIO BROADCASTING

Radio stations in India are regulated by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and
the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). The key rules and regulations governing
content on radio stations in India are: The Policy Guidelines for Expansion of FM Radio
Broadcasting Services through Private Agencies, 2005: These guidelines regulate the grant of
licenses for FM radio broadcasting services in India. The guidelines prescribe the eligibility
criteria for applicants, the terms and conditions of licenses, and the program and advertising
code for radio stations. The All India Radio (Broadcasting Code) and the AIR (Commercial
Broadcasting Service) Code: These codes prescribe the program and advertising code for All
India Radio (AIR) and private FM radio broadcasters, respectively. The program code regulates
the content of programs telecast on radio stations and prohibits the broadcast of certain types
of content, such as programs that promote violence, obscenity, or defamation. The advertising
code regulates the content of advertisements telecast on radio stations and requires
advertisements to be truthful, not misleading, and not offensive to public decency or morality.
The Guidelines for Digital Radio Broadcasting in India: These guidelines were issued by the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in 2019 and regulate the grant of licenses for digital
radio broadcasting services in India. The guidelines prescribe the eligibility criteria for
applicants, the terms and conditions of licenses, and the program and advertising code for
digital radio stations. Radio stations in India are required to comply with these rules and
regulations and are subject to penalties, including fines and suspension of broadcasting licenses,
for non-compliance. Additionally, various industry bodies, such as the Association of Radio
Operators for India (AROI), have established their own self-regulatory mechanisms to regulate
the content of radio stations in India.

IMPACT OF VISUAL & NON VISUAL MEDIA ON PEOPLE’S MIND

:
How do television and the other visual media affect the lives of individuals and families around the
globe? The media can be very helpful to people (and their children) who carefully choose what they
watch. With high-quality programming in various fields of study-science, medicine, nature, history, the
arts, and so on-TV, video tapes, and DVDs increase the knowledge of the average and the well-educated
person; they can also improve thinking ability. Moreover, television and other visual media benefit
elderly people who can’t go out often, as well as patients in hospitals and residents of nursing facilities.
Additionally, it offers language learners the advantage of “real-life” audiovisual instruction and aural
comprehension practice at any time of day or night. And of course, visual media can provide almost
everyone with good entertainment-a pleasant way to relax and spend free time at home. [B]
Nevertheless, there are several serious disadvantages to the visual media. First of all, some people
watch the “tube” for some hours in a day than they do anything else. In a large number of homes, TV
sets-as many as five or more in a single household-are always one. Many people watch TV for many
hours a day or spend hours playing games or surfing on their computers; they download music, movies
and other forms of entertainment. Instead of spending time taking care of their kids, parents often use a
video screen as an “electronic baby-sitter.” As a result, television and video can easily replace family
communication as well as physical activity and other interests. [C] Second, too much TV—especially
programming of low educational value—can reduce people’s ability to concentrate or reason. In fact,
studies show that after only a minute or two of visual media, a person’s mind “relaxes” as it does during
light sleep. Another possible effect of television and videotapes on the human brain is poor
communication. Children who watch a lot of TV may lose their ability to focus on a subject or an
educational activity for more than 10 to 15 minutes. Maybe it is because of the visual media that some
kids—and adults too—develop attention deficit disorder (ADD), a modern condition in which people are
unable to pay attention, listen well, follow instructions, or remember everyday things. Read the
following article carefully and answer the questions given below. HOW THE VISUAL MEDIA AFFECT
PEOPLE By Richard Gardner [D] A third negative feature of the media is the amount of violence on the
screen– both in real events in the news and movies or in TV programs. It scares people and gives them
terrible nightmares; the fear created by media images and language can last for a long time. On the
other hand, frequent viewers of “action programming” get used to its messages: they might begin to
believe there is nothing strange or unusual about violent crime, fights, killing, and other terrible events
and behavior. Studies show that certain personality types are likely to have strong emotional reactions
or dangerous thoughts after some kinds of “entertainment.” They may even copy the acts that they see
on violent shows— start fires, carry and use weapons, attack people in angry or dangerous ways, and
even worse. [E] Because of the visual media, some people may become dissatisfied with the reality of
their own lives. To these viewers, everyday life does not seem as exciting as the roles actors play in
movies or TV dramas. They realize they aren’t having as much fun as the stars of comedy shows.
Furthermore, average people with normal lives may envy famous media personalities, who seem to get
unlimited amounts of money and attention. Also, media watchers might get depressed when they can’t
take care of situations in real life as well as TV stars seem to. On the screen, they notice actors solve
serious problems in hour or half-hour programs—or in twenty-second commercials. [F] Yet another
negative feature of modern television is called “trash TV.” These daily talk shows bring real people with
strange or immoral lives, personalities, or behavior to the screen. Millions of viewers—including children
—watch as these “instant stars” tell their most personal secrets, shout out their angry feelings and
opinions, and attack one another. TV watchers seem to like the emotional atmosphere and excitement
of this kind of programming. What effect does frequent viewing of such programs have on people’s
lives? It makes television more real than reality, and normal living begins to seem boring. UNIVERSITY OF
DALAT - DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES [G] Finally, the most negative effect of all of these kinds
of visual media might be addiction. People often feel a strange and powerful need to watch TV,
download visual material, or play a DVD even when they don’t enjoy it or have the free time for
entertainment. Addiction to a TV or computer screen is similar to drug or alcohol dependence: addicts
almost never believe they are addicted. Even so, truthful media addicts have to answer yes to many of
these questions. Do you immediately turn on the TV set or computer when you arrive home from
school or work? Do you watch a lot of programming that requires little focus or thinking ability? Can
you concentrate on another topic or activity for only ten to fifteen minutes at a time? Do you enjoy the
action and violence of the media more than activity in your own life?

FREEDOM OF PRESS IN INDIA

“Freedom of Press is an Article of Faith with us, sanctioned by our Constitution, validated by four
decades of freedom and indispensable to our future as a Nation.” : Former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi

Press Freedom in India This editorial analysis is based on “The silence around the state’s seizure of
India’s press” which was published in The Hindu on 10/10/2023. It talks about how India is passing
through a transitory emergency as well as a marked phase of digital authoritarianism. In this context, it
appears that the higher judiciary is displaying reluctance to take decisive action.

A free press plays a crucial role in safeguarding democracy and fostering a transparent and accountable
government. However, recent actions against journalists associated with the online portal NewsClick,
including raids, seizures, and arrests, have intensified concerns about the protection of digital data and
press freedom in India. In the midst of the digital revolution, India confronts a threat from digital
authoritarianism. At this critical juncture, India needs both political action and judicial determination to
safeguard press freedom in the country. What does the term "Press Freedom" mean? Press freedom is a
fundamental principle that allows journalists and media organizations to operate without censorship or
government interference. It is a core component of freedom of expression and is essential for a
democratic society. Press freedom encompasses the following key aspects: Freedom from Censorship:
Journalists and media outlets should be able to publish or broadcast news and information without
government-imposed censorship. Access to Information: A free press should have access to information
and sources to investigate and report on matters of public interest. Independence: Editorial
independence ensures that news reporting is based on facts and not influenced by outside interests.
Protection of Sources: Journalists should be able to protect their sources to encourage whistleblowers
and informants to come forward with information without fear of exposure or reprisal. Pluralism and
Diversity: A free press should encompass a diverse range of viewpoints and opinions, allowing for open
debate and discussion in society. Accountability: The media should hold those in power accountable by
investigating and reporting on their actions and decisions. Constitutional Background: Freedom of the
Press is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. However, Freedom of press or media refers to the
rights given by the Constitution of India under the freedom and expression of speech in Article 19(1)(a).
It encourages independent journalism and promotes democracy by letting the people voice their
opinions for or against the government’s actions. Article 19 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
enshrined that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom
to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media and regardless of frontiers. However, there are certain restrictions in Article 19(2) to protect
the nation and its integrity.

What is the Importance of a Free Press for India? Democracy and Accountability: Journalists investigate
and report on government actions, policies, and decisions, holding officials accountable for their actions.
Information Dissemination: It helps citizens stay informed about current events, government activities,
and societal issues, enabling them to make informed decisions and participate actively in the democratic
process. Check on Power: A free press acts as a check on the abuse of power by the government and
other powerful entities. It helps uncover corruption, human rights abuses, and other wrongdoing,
making it difficult for those in authority to act with impunity. Transparency and Accountability: A free
press promotes transparency in government operations and decision-making processes. It helps uncover
hidden agendas, conflicts of interest, and other factors that may influence government actions. Diverse
Voices: India is a diverse country with a multitude of languages, cultures, and perspectives. A free press
provides a platform for diverse voices and viewpoints, ensuring that the concerns of various
communities are heard. Protection of Fundamental Rights: A free press is a guardian of fundamental
rights, including the right to freedom of expression and the right to know. It helps protect these rights by
advocating for the rights of individuals and groups. International Standing: India's reputation on the
global stage is influenced by its commitment to press freedom. Upholding press freedom demonstrates
a commitment to democratic values and human rights, enhancing India's standing in the international
community. Which Institutions are Responsible for Protecting Press Freedom in India? Press Council of
India (PCI): The Press Council of India is a statutory body established under the Press Council Act, 1978.
It acts as a watchdog to safeguard and promote press freedom and the ethical standards of journalism.
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting: The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting is a government
body responsible for formulating policies and guidelines related to the media sector in India. News
Broadcasters Association (NBA): NBA is a self-regulatory body representing the private television news
and current affairs broadcasters in India. It formulates and enforces a code of ethics and standards for
television news channels. Editors Guild of India: This is a voluntary association of editors of leading
newspapers and news magazines in India. It plays a crucial role in defending press freedom and
addressing issues related to the rights and responsibilities of journalists. Legal System: India's legal
system, including the judiciary, plays a significant role in upholding press freedom. Courts have the
authority to address violations of press freedom, protect journalists, and interpret laws related to
media. In 1950, the Supreme Court in Romesh Thappar v. The State of Madras observed that freedom of
the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations. International Organizations: International
organizations such as Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
monitor press freedom in India and raise awareness about violations on the global stage. What are the
Challenges associated with Press Freedom in India? Legal and Regulatory Constraints: India has laws that
can be used to restrict press freedom, such as defamation laws, sedition laws, and laws related to
national security. These laws are sometimes used to intimidate journalists and media organizations.
Government Interference: There have been instances of government interference in the editorial
independence of media outlets. Governments may use advertising budgets as a tool to reward or punish
media organizations, which can influence their reporting. Threats and Violence: Journalists in India often
face physical threats and violence, especially when reporting on sensitive issues like corruption,
organized crime, or communal tensions. Some journalists have been attacked or even killed in the line of
duty. Self-Censorship: Due to fear of reprisals or pressure from various sources, journalists and media
outlets may engage in self-censorship, avoiding certain topics or taking a cautious approach to reporting.
Ownership and Control: Media ownership in India is often concentrated in the hands of a few powerful
entities, which can influence editorial decisions and limit the diversity of voices in the media landscape.
Defamation Lawsuits: Journalists and media organizations in India are frequently targeted with
defamation lawsuits, which can be time-consuming and financially burdensome.

What Measures can be Taken to Ensure a Free and Impartial Press in India? Strengthen Legal
Protections: Reform laws that can be misused to restrict press freedom, such as defamation and sedition
laws. Ensure swift and fair legal processes in cases involving press freedom violations. Independent
Regulatory Framework: Establish independent media regulatory bodies with members representing a
cross-section of society, ensuring that they are free from government control and political influence.
Protect Journalists and Whistleblowers: Enact and enforce laws that protect journalists from
harassment, violence, and threats, both online and offline. Establish mechanisms to protect
whistleblowers who provide information to the media in the public interest. Promote Transparency:
Enact robust freedom of information or access to information laws to promote transparency and enable
journalists to access government information. Promote transparency in media ownership to prevent
media concentration and conflicts of interest.. Public Broadcasting Independence: Ensure the
independence of public broadcasting institutions from government control and influence. Appoint
qualified and impartial boards to oversee public broadcasters, and ensure their funding is secure and
nonpartisan. Promote Journalistic Ethics: Encourage media organizations to adhere to a code of ethics
that emphasizes accuracy, fairness, and balanced reporting. Support professional development and
training for journalists to maintain high ethical standards. Raise public awareness about the importance
of a free and impartial press in a democratic society. International Cooperation: Collaborate with
international organizations, such as UNESCO and international press freedom groups, to promote press
freedom and share best practices. The UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists aims to create a
free and safe environment for journalists and media workers. Conclusion Addressing the issue of press
freedom in India will require a concerted effort from various stakeholders, with a shared commitment to
upholding the principles of a free press in a democratic society. It is a complex challenge that needs
continuous attention and action to ensure a vibrant and independent media environment in the country.

FREEDOM OF PRESS AND LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEDGES

What is legislative privilege? To enable legislators to effectively perform their functions, to discuss and
debate matters of importance without fear or favour, without hindrance or obstruction, the Constitution
confers special rights on Parliament and the State Legislatures. Freedom of press and legislative
privileges - conflict of : The conflicts of freedom of press guaranteed under Art.19(1)(a) and the
legislative under Art.105 and Art.194 are unavoidable. .. The Supreme Court M.S.M. Sharma v. Sri
Krishna Sinha8 , held that under the scheme of the Constitution of India, the legislature have the right
and privilege to prohibit absolutely the publication of the report of the debates and the proceedings in
the floors of the houses and the houses are competent to impose punishment for breach of such
privileges. Thus the freedom of speech and expression as contained in Art. 19(1)(a) is subjected to
Art.105(3) and Art.194(3) of the Constitution. The privilege of Legislature prevails over the fundamental
right to freedom of speech and expression. The reports of the proceedings in newspapers are protected
under the Parliamentary Proceedings (Protection of Publication of Act. 1977. The Parliament has the
power to power to the publication of its proceedings and prescribe punishment the resolution of the
house of Parliament. In case of conflict between the fundamental right to freedom of speech and
expression and the privilege of Legislature, the privilege of Legislature shall privilege the fundamental
fight freedom of speech and expression. In case of any conflict between the privilege of the Parliament
under Art.105(3) of the Constitution and the freedom of speech and expression, the inconsistency has to
be resolved by harmonious construction of the provisions. Article 19(1)(a) being general in nature must
give away to the special provision under Art.105(3) of the Constitution. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
ENSURING FREEDOM OF PRESS: 1. Codification of Legislative Privileges A complementary measure will
be to insist upon the codification of legislative privileges, with the proviso that where a breach of
privilege is alleged, the legislature should only be permitted to file a complaint, the decision regarding
whether contempt is proved and, if so, the punishment to be awarded being left to a Court of Law. The
idea that the legislature should itself be both the accuser and the judge might have had a historical
reason in England; but there is not reason for such a fundamentally unjust approach to be accepted in
our context. 7 AIR 1950 SC 129 8 AIR 1959 SC 395 2. The Main Goal - Growth with Freedom What should
never be overlooked when thinking of the Press in the Indian context is that it is only a free Press which
can help develop a body of citizens who are well informed both regarding current events and also about
the problems facing the country; and the alternatives available for tackling them. It is only such a Press
that can enable a young democracy like India to survive, and also help its development in a manner
where social justice is ensured and the interests of the common people served. 3. Importance of
Constitutional Amendment All the difficulties in the way of ensuring that the Press can have the
maximum freedom to carry out its function of collecting facts about different facets of national life,
analysing them and commenting upon them so as to keep the general body of citizens in our young
democracy well informed show that the Press requires some special protection. Many authorities have
held that the Right to Freedom of Speech conferred by Article 19(1) of the Constitution is adequate to
protect the freedom of the Press. Further, due regard has to be given to the recommendations made by
the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC). They have recommended
the inclusion of Freedom of Press-media under Article 19(1)(a). 4. Press Needs To Improve The
inadequacies of the Indian Press need not be connived at. There is no doubt that private business and
those who control it, are treated by most newspapers with kidgloves. This partly is because of the
ownership of many newspapers and therefore the philosophy of those who are appointed to senior
journalistic positions. It is seen that the editors and journalists cannot have adequate freedom of
collecting and disseminating facts and offering comments as they are under the pressure of the capitalist
owners. So, the pressure of the capitalist owners should be minimized. Vol-4 Issue-5 2018 IJARIIE-
ISSN(O)-2395-4396 9081 www.ijariie.com 217 5. Positive Assistance To Independent Papers At the same
time, it is important that steps are taken positively to make it possible for independent papers to survive
and develop. Assistance to them should be provided through general institutions meant to help the
growth of independent entrepreneurs, including small ones. 6. The State, should stop becoming the
Main Threat This resistance is necessary because experience all over the world, as well as our own
experience since Independence, suggest that the State remains the source of the most potential threat
to Press freedom. CONCLUSION On analysing the current scenario, latest issues and developments of
Freedom of Press, it can be concluded that although the Press is considered the watchdog of democracy,
sadly, there is scant regard for this truism in a country which is, ironically, the world's largest democracy.
In keeping with its affirmation that freedom of expression is “one of the essential foundations of a
democratic society”, the Court has clearly shown a preference for freedom of press. In conclusion, it
must be reiterated that the freedom of press and information are fundamental to healthy working of a
democracy and therefore, must coexist with the freedom of speech and expression.

NEWS PRINT CONTROL ORDER ACT

NEWSPRINT CONTROL ORDER, 1962 22. Published in the Gazette of India, Pt. II, Sec. 3 (ii), dated the
28thMarch, 1964, vide S.O. No. E.C.A./3-64, dated the 17th March, 1964.I n exercise of the powers
conferred by Sec. 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) the Central Government hereby
makes the following Order, namely : 1. Short title and commencement :- (1) This Order may be called
the Newsprint Control Order, 1962. (2) It shall come into force at once. 2. Definitions :- In this order,
unless the context otherwise requires,- (a) "consumer of newsprint" means a printer or publisher of
newspapers, periodicals, text-books or books of general interest who uses newsprint; (b) "Controller"
means the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and includes any officer appointed by the Central
Government to exercise the powers of the Controller under this Order; (c) "dealer in newsprint" means
an importer of newsprint and includes the State Trading Corporation of India Limited, any stockist of the
Corporation 1[an agent appointed by any Mill as specified in item 3 of Sch. I for distribution of their
newsprint and a person authorised by the newspapers for taking deliveries of newsprint on their
behalf]; (d) "licensing period" means the period from the 1st April to the 30th September of a year or
from the 1st October of a year to the 31st March of the following year; 2[(e) "newsprint" means paper
of any of the descriptions specified in Sch. I, used for printing and shall include odd sized newsprint
3[whether produced indigenously by any mill as specified in item 3 of Sch. I or imported and certified to
be as such by the Controller]; 4[(ee) "reject newsprint" means any newsprint 5 [produced by any Mill as
specified in item 3 of Sch. I] which cannot be used by a printer or publisher on a rotary printing press on
account of numerous joints or crushed central core in it or otherwise defective]. (f) "Schedule" means a
schedule to this Order. 1. Subs. by S.O. 284 (E), dated 26th April, 1982. 2. Subs. by S.O. 622 (E), dated the
30th October, .1975, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Pt. II, Sec. 3 (ii), dated the 30th
October, 1975. 3. Subs. by S.O. 284 (E), dated 26th April, 1982. 4. Ins. by S.O. 622 (E), dated the 30th
October, 1975, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Pt. II, Sec. 3 (ii), dated the 30th October,
1975. 5. Subs. by S.O. 284 (E), dated 26th April, 1982. 3. Restrictions on acquisition, sale and
consumption of newsprint :- (1) No person other than an importer shall acquire newsprint except under
and in accordance with the terms and conditions of an authorization issued by the Controller under this
Order. (2) No dealer in newsprint shall sell to any person newsprint of any description or in any quantity
unless the sale to that person of newsprint of that description or in that quantity is authorized by the
Controller. (3) No consumer of newsprint shall in any licensing period, consume or use newsprint in
excess of the quantity authorised by the Controller from time to time. 1 [(3-A)* * * *]. (4) An
authorization under this clause shall be in writing in the Form set out in Sch. II. (5) In issuing an
authorization under this clause, the Controller shall have regard to the principles laid down in the Import
Control Policy with respect to newsprint announced by the Central Government from time to time. 1.
Clause 3-A omitted by S.O. 614 (E), dated 15th September, 1976 published in the Gazette of India.
Extraordinary, Pt. II, Sec. 3 (ii), dated 16th September, 1976. 4. Power to requisition stocks :- The
Controller may, with a view to maintaining supplies of newsprint or securing its equitable distribution,
by order, require any person other than a consumer holding stock of newsprint- (a) to sell the whole or a
specified part of the stock to the Government or to an officer of the Government or to such other
person or class of persons and at such price as may be specified in the order; (b) not to sell or deliver the
stock without the permission in writing of the Controller; (c) if he is not the owner of the stock, to
disclose the name of the owner. 5. Account and returns :- (1) Every dealer in newsprint and every
consumer of newsprint shall maintain a true and correct account of newsprint acquired and disposed of
by him and shall submit to the Controller- (a) within one month from the commencement of this Order,
a return showing the stock of newsprint held by him at such commencement; and (b) thereafter, for the
half-year ending the 30th June and the 31st December of each year so as to reach the Controller within
fifteen days of the close of the half- year, a return showing the stock of newsprint acquired and disposed
of by him during the period covered by the return. (2) The return referred to in sub-clause (1) shall be in
the Form set out in Sch. III. 1 [****]. 1. Omitted by S.O. 861 (E), dated 26th November, 1983. Earlier It
was inserted by S.O. 284 (E), dated 26th April, 1982. 6. Power to call for information :- The Collector or
any gazetted officer duly uthorized by him in writing in this behalf may, with a view to securing
compliance with this order,- (a) require any person to give any information in his possession relating to
the acquisition or disposal of newsprint; (b) inspect any books of account or other documents in the
possession or under the control of any person relating to the acquisition or disposal of newsprint. 7.
Saving :- Nothing in this Order shall apply to- (a) the acquisition or sale of newsprint 1[manufactured by
any Mill as specified in item 3 of Sch. I] not exceeding 200 kilograms in weight in any one transaction;
2[* * *]; 3[(aa) the acquisition or sale of reject newsprint 4[* * *]; (b) any transfer of stock of newsprint
by one consumer to another by way of loan for a period not exceeding three months, provided that the
transferee and the transferor give to the Controller intimation of the transfer within thirty days thereof;
5 [(c) sale of any kind of waste newsprint by any dealer in newsprint or the sale, acquisition,
consumption or use of such newsprint by any consumer of newsprint]

CENCORSHIP OF FILMS

10
Introduction
Censorship is a phenomenon found in the context of an authority and its exercise of freedom
over its subjects. An
authority interacts with its subjects through various media (print media in the form of
newspapers, books, documents
or audio-visual media like tv programs, films etc). Media are the ways to control, to
motivate, to inform the subjects.
No medium has a static function and a medium is not merely a medium. People
watch a film maybe for
entertainment, but a film provides information or motivation while entertaining them. A
medium exists in a plural-
sphere, it has more than one purpose, it has more than one element, it has more than one
structure, more than one
reading. A film as a medium may record a history, may produce a new tradition, may write
geography newly, may
create awareness, may add to a scientific discovery so on and so forth. As it is one of the
most alluring audio-visual
medium, it has the maximum effect on the people. If the effect violates the prescribed
norms of an authority, the
authority censors the effect-producing films. According to the Supreme Court of India, film
censorship becomes
necessary because a film motivates thought and action and assures a high degree of
attention and retention as
1
compared to the printed word (CBFC, India).This paper will discuss about the film
censorship in India.

Discussion:

2
The Oxford Dictionary of English defines censorship as the suppression or prohibition of any
parts of books, films,
news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
By the end of 2014,there
came a controversy over Amir Khan's PK, a Hindi movie in India. The controversy was
whether it should be banned
or it should be allowed to be watched in many Indian states. Mostly who were bringing a
ban over PK were the
Indians who thought that their religious sentiments had been mocked at or
caricatured. In spite of these
controversies, it became a hit in India. It shows that individually every Indian likes to watch
the movie. A common
man who knew what entertainment was but did not know what this controversy was, went
to a cinema hall and
watched it or bought a CD and watched it. Sometimes such banning is caused by invisible
forces which are driven
by market or which are genuinely driven by religious sentiments.

8
Censorship is never felt individually, it is always a subject where the forces of community or
a group could be seen.
We all watch movies, we all read books. Watching movie is an individual experience; it can
be watched in a group,
sitting in a theater with 200-500 people. But all 200-500 people do have 200 or 500
experiences of watching a
movie. Then the question comes, who finds out the filthy affair? No individual, but
individuals with groups. If we
analyze the history of film censorship in India, one can state that a film is banned or
censored on the following
reasons: i) Sexuality, ii) Politics, iii) Religion, iv) Communal conflict, v) incorrect
portrayal of someone or
something, vi) extreme violence
i) Sexuality: Indian society has been following a rigid social structure. Marriage is a social
institution where it has
allowed sexual relationship between a man and a woman, although human beings do
have other forms of sexual
relationship like homosexual, lesbian, which have been discarded by Indian society or
Freudian concept of Oedipal
longing has been highly criticized. A medium whether written or audio-visual portraying
sexuality which has not
been accepted by Indian society openly is banned on the ground that it may degrade the
morals of Indians. On this
ground, Kamasutra, an erotic film was banned in India because of its depiction of sexual and
homosexual contents.
3
Deepa Mehta‟s Fire was banned in India as it depicted lesbian relationship. It was one of
the first films that showed
explicit homosexual relationship. There were huge protests against the film by the Hindu
fundamentalists. It was
again sent back to the Censor Board, but later it was released by changing the name of the
character Sita to Nita. The
4
Pink Mirror (GulabiAaina) , a 2004 film was banned in India for its depiction of transsexual
contents. The Girl with
5
the Dragon Tattoo was banned for its adult scenes of rape and torture. In shooting
set,the movie, Water, faced
objections from many Hindu organizations in Varanasi, as it depicted controversial
subject like misogyny and
ostracism. Later it was shifted to Srilanka. Sexuality has never been discussed openly
in India. Some religions
completely discourage all forms of sexuality. It is a fact in our day today life which is
always kept secret. Even
imparting sex education in Indian schools has been in the debate but has not been made a
part of the syllabi.
ii) Politics: Political forces cannot be isolated as far as the topic of censorship is concerned.
Censoring a film by a
political state is always supported by the parties who are with the authority directly
or indirectly. A medium
describing a political situation allegorically or directly is banned by a government who is a
party to it. It may be an
international political issue like the Neel AkasherNeechey. Neel AkasherNeechey was a
Bengali language film
directed by Mrinal Sen was the first film to be banned by the Government of India because
of its overt political
6
overtones . Its background was set in the last days of British Raj in Calcutta (Kolkata) when
the freedom struggle
was at its pick. The film was about Wang lu, a Chinese man who was an immigrant wage
labor and his relationship
7
with Basanti, a house wife in Calcutta. Gokul Shankar ,was banned in 1963 by Government
of India for portraying
the psychological motivations behind NathuramGodse‟s assassination of Mahatma
8
Gandhi. GaramHawa , a 1973
Hindi-Urdu film, was directed by M.S. Sathyu. It was based on an unpublished short story by
IsmatChughtai. It was
about the fate of a North Indian Muslim businessman and his family in the tragic time of
partition. Censor board
ofIndia banned it for 8 months thinking that it might cause communal unrest but later it
9
was released.Aandhi , a
1975 film which was thought to be an allegory of then the Prime Minister of India, Indira
Gandhi was banned by
Indira Gandhi during the national emergency of 1975. When Janata Party came to
power, it was released in
10
1977.KissaKursiKa , a satirical film on the politics of Indira Gandhi and her son, Sanjaya
Gandhi; was banned by
the Congress government during the emergency period. There were 51 objections and the
director was asked to give
explanation. Sikkim,a 1971 documentary film, directed by Satyajit Ray; was a commissioned
film by then the king

9
of Sikkim when he felt that Sikkim was under threat from both India and China. It was banned by the
government of
11
India when Sikkim was merged with India in 1975. In 2010, the ban was lifted.Kuttrapathirikai , a
Tamil drama
film was not released until 2007, as it had the issues of the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi and the
Srilankan civil
12
war.Aarakshan , the Hindi movie was banned in Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab with the
concern that it
may hurt the weaker sections of the society as it deals with politics over reservation in educational
institutions. In
the early part of June, 2016, we saw a controversy over the film Udta Punjab, directed by
AbhisekChaubey. CBFC
decided to have the film released with some cuts. It was a drug-themed film with particular
reference to Punjab.
Punjab and Haryana high courts also issued show-cause notice to the government of India, the
CBFC and the
producers. The film was considered to have some negative portrayal of the Punjabis and Punjab.
iii) Religion: Religion as an institution does not approve any kind of disobedience towards the values it
propagates.
Any medium that distorts the religious characters of a religion is criticized and censored by the
same. Religious
13
sentiment does cause film censorship in India. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom , a 1984
American adventure
film which was banned temporarily by the government of India as it depicted the goddess Kali as a
representative of
underworld. Censor Board took a note of religious sentiment and put a ban on it. Yvette Claire Rosser,
a famous
American writer criticizes the film as it depicts Indians not what they are but what they are in the
Westerner's eyes.
In 2006, The Da Vinci Code was banned in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Nagaland, Goa, and Punjab
with the
concern that the film might hurt religious sentiments of the Christians. The recent controversy over
PK also falls
under this category.
iv) CommunalConflict: A film is also censored if it incites any kind of communal conflict under a
heterogeneous
14
nation. Heterogeneity is a feature of India as a nation. FinalSolution , a 2004 documentary film was
banned by the
Censor Board of India as it was based on the Gujarat riots. It was thought that the film might bring
huge communal
15
riots.Hawayein , a 2003 bollywood film, was banned in Delhi, Haryana and Punjab as it set against
the backdrop to
16
the 1984 Sikh genocide . Another film, entitled Amu on the November event of 1984 Sikh riots was
allowed by the
17 18
Censor Board of India with some audio cuts .In 2013, Vishwaroopam was banned as the objection
was received
from Muslim groups regarding their portrayal.
v) Incorrect Portrayal of a Popular Figure: Sometime it is a popular man who objects to his own
depiction in a
19
medium and goes for censoring it. Bandit Queen , a biographical film based on Phoolan Devi,
was banned
temporarily by the Delhi High Court after Phoolan Devi sued a case against its authenticity.
Main Hoon
20
Rajinikanth , a Hindi comedy film was criticized by Rajnikanth who went to High Court to
stop its relese.
21
Rajanikanth thought the film may spoil his image. The film, Jodhaa Akbar , was banned after
Rajput‟s

community‟s protest over Jodha Bai‟s

depiction as Akbar‟s wife. Later it was
released.
vi) ExtremeViolence:Portraying extreme violence disturbs human mind. One of the primary
purposes of watching
films is entertainment although violence is a fact of life. Portraying extreme violence in
films affects the people
22
psychologicallyPaanch is an unreleased Indian film. It was directed by AnuragKashyap.The
Central Board of Film
Certification objected to its depiction of violence.But later it was allowed to be released with
cuts but could not get
released.
These bannings are from an authority, an organization, a board or a court or by a popular
individual. First question
comes to my mind is: do the things exist in India that the films portray? We cannot take up
biographical films into
account, as their authorities are the authors. But consider the politics over reservation,
deception in the name of
religion, changing sexual scenario of India, communal riots, changing life-style in India. An
Indian who witnesses
all these happening in day- to-day life cannot deny it, when it is portrayed in a film. Above
all, film is an effective
media and as entertainment is attached to it, it allures all from a child to an old man.
Although freedom of speech is
a fundamental right in the Constitution of India, it does not allowindividuals the right freely,
clause-2 of article 19 of
the constitution of India restricts the freedom of speech on the following subjects: I.
security of the State, II.
Friendly relations with foreign States, III.Public order, IV. Decency and morality, V.
contempt of court, VI.
Defamation, VII.Incitement to an offence, and VIII.Sovereignty and integrity of India.As
per the IT rules,2011,
the content which “threatens the unity, integrity, defense, security or sovereignty of
India, friendly relations with
foreign states or public order" has to be objected. The Central Board of Film Certification
allows some films with
explicitly sexual content but such films should be shown only in restricted places and to the
people above 18 yrs.
Conclusion:
Censorship is a control of an authority over its subjects. An authority is always political and it
prescribes various
norms for its subjects to rule them in a desired designed way. Although an authority is made
of the people under it,
the authority is an artificial construct in a civilization. This is why the norms can be
challenged. What is censored
today may not be censored tomorrow. The way the films are censored in India
witnesses the continuity of the
traditionally followed norms in India and reinforces the same. Norms may not necessarily be
static, they may change
in time. The reality is always ahead with the prescribed norms which may result in
modifying the same under an
authority. Exhibiting homosexual relationship through a film in India goes against the
prescribed norms at present,
but the same norm will be changed in a time when it will be a realized reality.

ABBAS’S CASE

K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, 1970 : case analysis

Biography of Khwaja Ahmad Abbas

Khwaja Ahmad Abbas was born on “June 7, 1914, in Panipat, India, and died on June 1, 1987, in New
Delhi, India. he was born at the home of Altaf Hussain Hali, who was Mirza Ghalib’s disciple. Khwaja
Abbas, also known as K. A. Abbas, was an Indian film director, screenwriter, author, and columnist who
worked in the Urdu, Hindi, and English languages.” Khwaja Abbas was born in the Indian state of
Punjab. With “four National Film Awards in India and the Palme d’Or and Crystal Globe at the Karlovy
Vary International Film Festival under his belt, he’s had a successful career both at home and abroad.”

He obtained a Bachelor’s degree in English literature in 1933 and a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1935
from Aligarh Muslim University. As soon as Abbas finished college, he got a job as a writer with the
New Delhi-based National Call. Aligarh Opinion was founded in 1934, while studying law at Aligarh
University. The Bombay Chronicle hired him in 1935 as a political journalist, and was eventually
promoted to the position of movie critic.”
When he initially got into movies, he was working as a part-time publicist for Himanshu Rai and Devika
Rani’s production company, Bombay Talkies, where he managed to sell his first script, Naya Sansar.
Abbas was a prolific author who penned 74 novels in three languages: English, Hindi, and Urdu. Abbas
was widely regarded as one of the most important figures in Urdu short tale. His best-known book is
‘Inquilab,’ a novel on racial violence in India that made him famous.

Khwaja Ahmad Abbas is a filmmaker and screenwriter who is “widely regarded as one of the founding
fathers of Indian parallel or neo-realistic theatres. As a scriptwriter, he is also credited with penning
some of Raj Kapoor’s most memorable films.”

About the movie and the controversial part

Aside from a song the workers sang while working as well as some background music for stage effects,
the film is in black & white and silent. There are contrasted moments throughout the film, including
fast-paced action sequences as well as still images showing opulent palaces, hotels, and industries,
which illustrate the wealth of the few while showing the poverty of the many. These shots are
interspersed with others that depict sweaty construction workers toiling away to construct the former,
as well as scenes depicting their miserable personal lives.

It’s not uncommon for images to contrast wealthy individuals driving luxurious automobiles with street
vendors in the Indian cities of Calcutta and Madras. In one shot, a “chubby and wealthy customer is
depicted riding a sweaty and panting rickshaw pulled by an elderly man. In a contrasting scenario, the
same rickshaw puller is seen seated in the rickshaw pushed by his previous customer, on display are
sculptures of Indian Freedom Movement leaders staring haplessly from high pedestals, in front of
palatial buildings on the misery of the people.”

Several realistic sequences dealing with prostitution are featured in the film as it continues to examine
the topic of males suppression and exploitation of women. The film begins with a one-minute scan of
Bombay’s “Cages,” or red light area, which depicts prostitutes in short costumes sitting around and
brothels in miniskirts and sleeveless dresses.

The image changes to show one of the prostitutes closing a window, implying how she will amuse her
client. Next, a shot shows the hands of a woman carrying some cash, which are grabbed away by a
man hand (impliedly those of the pimp). Symbolically, the film closes with a scene in which the
prostitute sees her chamber as a prison and dreams about her life before she was engaged in this sex
racket.

Background of the case

Films are banned in many nations to keep an eye on the various social, economic, and political
concerns they may cause, which might encourage or stir up hatred among the general public. While
the Cinematograph Act of 1952 limits censorship in India, censorship that is allowed to protect the
public interest can only be carried out if certain requirements are met, such as reasonable restrictions.

A plea for the enforcement of fundamental rights was filed under Article 32 of Constitution of India in
this instance. Part 11 of the Cinematograph Act of 1952 imposes regulations on the Central
Government, which the Petitioners argue are illegal and invalid. A writ of mandamus or other suitable
writ, directive or order was sought by the applicant to prevent the removal of specific documentary
film footage.

Facts of the case

The film questioned the link between basic rights and the Cinematograph Act, 1952, testing the
Censorship Committee’s political liberalist arguments and causing a shock wave in the court. I mages
showing Bombay’s red-light area posed the most difficult for the Censorship Board and judges to deal
with.

Abbas urged a ‘U’ certificate from the Censor board enabling the film’s unrestricted screening, but the
local supervisor notified him that the reviewing team had temporarily determined that it must be
confined to adults. The filmmaker insisted the sequences be aired, if not with a ‘U’ classification, then
with no restraints. The reviewing committee concurred with this conclusion, and Abbas moved to the
central govt following discussions with the panel.

The government has chosen to award a ‘U’ rating “As part of the certification process, if the portions
shot in the red light area were removed from the movie. The Examining Committee of the Censor
Board recommended that a ‘U’ certificate only be issued to a viewership of exclusively adults. After a
complaint, the court recommended a ‘U’ certification if several red-light district images depicting
unethical exploitation, corporate exploitation, and prostitution were removed.

The petitioner argues in this case that he had been deprived freedom of speech and expression, that
the Cinematograph Act of 1952 is unconstitutional and null, and that he was refused the ‘U’
certification to which he was eligible. The Central Govt, on the other hand, decided to award the movie
the ‘U’ certification without proposing any modifications.

In light of this new circumstance, the petitioner sought and the court granted permission to modify his
complaint. He further argued that pre-censorship had no legitimate aim because the law’s provisions
were imprecise, capricious, and indefinitely granted to various agencies.

Issues of the case

Abbas then filed a lawsuit arguing :

(1) that the pre-censorship practised by the censorship board infringed fundamental rights to freedom
of speech and expression, and that even if pre-censorship was an acceptable constraint, it had to be
done in accordance with strict guidelines that excluded unilateral actions.

(2) the decision of the film censorship board must be made within a reasonably set time period, and A
court of law, not the federal government, should hear the final appeal in the case.

Supreme court observation and judgment

Chief Justice Hidayatullah, Justice Shelat, Mitter, Vidyialingam, and Ray delivered their judgement in
the landmark case of K. A. Abbas v. Union of India, in “which they mentioned that courts do not
recognise the difference between pre-censorship, and witnessed that both are controlled by the
benchmark of reasonable restrictions in Article 19(1) of Constitution Of India.”

While the right to free speech and expression is guaranteed by the Constitution, it has been
acknowledged that reasonable limits can be placed on it. According to the Constitution, pre-censorship
was allowed in order to maintain public tranquility and protect the rule of law. The Judiciary is viewed
as a constitutional defender in the pursuit of justice and the preservation of the public interest.

The judges in this case rationalised that pre-censorship of movies is lawfully justified on the grounds of
the following reasoning- “pre-censorship or prior restriction is simply one component of censorship in
general, censorship in the interests of decency and morality etc., is constitutionally sound in India
under article 19(2) of the Constitution, consequently pre-censorship is also constitutionally valid.”
The flaw in this logic lies in the first premise: the assumption that pre-censorship is the same as any
other kind of restriction, with the exception of the time or moment at which it is imposed. While this
near resemblance may be correct in principle, it is vastly different in practise due to censorship. Many
factors prove to be more effective and easier for the censor than ex post facto penalties or limitations,
and it is thus less flexible and adaptable in the sake of safeguarding personal freedoms and rights.

To begin with, a system of pre censorship inevitably exposes considerably more communication to
official examination than subsequent penalties since it puts all expression in the regulated area – both
innocent and objectionable – to the government’s approval. As a result of the extensive use of
government influence, additional concerns relating to free speech will inevitably be handled.

As a result of ex post facto penalization, whatever value a communication may have, it has a chance of
reaching the “free exchange of ideas,” but under pre-censorship, it’ll never make it to market or be so
far behind schedule that it becomes outdated or unsustainable.

Thirdly, a prior restriction system entails the possibility of an adverse ruling opposing freedom of
expression. It’s “far easier for censors to do the same thing with a pen or scissors than it is for
government officials underneath a prior restraint system since they don’t have to go through the
lengthy and costly process of litigation.”

Furthermore, the “pre-censorship system also lacks the procedural safeguards of a criminal
prosecution, such as assumption of innocence, stricter standards of evidence and process, and a
heavier onus of evidence on the state. As a result, under a system of pre-censorship, the censor has
far more latitude to trample on the right to free expression.”

Furthermore, a system of prior restriction functions under a veil of informality and partial secrecy, so
there is less possibility for public inspection and critique. As a result, “the policies and procedures of
licencing bodies do not receive as much people’s attention as they should, and the grounds for
administrative action are less likely to be recognised and challenged as they should. This nefarious
encroachment into civil rights does not bode well for the future of the democratic system.”

In conclusion, although it is correct that a prior restriction system provides more security in the law
with much less risk since an individual may find out about acceptable and prohibited communications,
even without risk of criminal restrictions if his legal interpretation is incorrect, the use of such a system
is premised on the assumption of intention to comply to official opinion and implies in the long-term
there will be less instead of more interaction.

Besides these strong grounds, pre-censorship has become a source of contention in India for a long
period of time. Furthermore, previous restrictions on communication have been held to be
unconstitutional in several non-film censorship matters.

According to the Supreme Court in the case of “Bhushan v. State of Delhi, “the Chief Commissioner of
Delhi had violated the East Punjab Security Act by ordering the printhead, publisher, and editor of an
English-language weekly journal called the ‘Organizor’ to report all communal issue, news, and views
about Pakistan, besides those deduced from legitimate sources, to be scrutinised in duplicate before
publishing in the Organizor.”

There can be no question that placing pre-censorship on a newspaper is a restraint on the press
freedom, which is a crucial part of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression
guaranteed by Article 19(1) of the Constitution. The court found this to be an unjustified restrictions.

This criterion should be applicable to film certification until clearly proven that films have a greater
capacity for evil than other media of communication, requiring prior limitations to be imposed.

When it came to the question of whether there were enough guidelines in the Act, the court found that
the ones included in Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution were more than adequate. However, it is
necessary to make the boundary between artistic and non-artistic expressions clearer when judging
obscenity. The Court noted that he cannot be the sole cause for repealing the Act.

As a result, the Supreme Court upheld the Cinematograph Act, 1952’s restrictions on public exhibition,
rejecting the petition that challenged the power of censorship, stating that “pre-censorship fell within
the reasonable restrictions allowed under freedom of speech and expression, and also that the Act
provides a means and arrangements to avert arbitrariness in the exercise of powers conferred.”

OWNERSHIP PATTERNS

Media Ownership Patterns

The media that exists in our Country is heavily influenced by the ownership form it
takes. There are a number of factors – such as content distribution, profits etc.
There exist some very basic ownership Patterns.
Individual Ownership Pattern – In this kind of partnership, the Individual has
control, which allows him to take decisions for the company. Therefore, he takes
responsibility for all the Policy – making decisions and is also accountable for
them. It is best suited for small-scale media houses, be it newspaper or news
channel. An example of this are the Local Evening Newspapers that usually follow
this kind of ownership control. The News Today is a daily English Newspaper that
is printed out of Chennai. It covers news, politics, economy and travel.
[Advantages] In this kind of ownership, power comes in the form of individual and
absolute control, which gives the person more secrecy in options. Along with it, the
individual can make decisions at his own pace (which is usually fast) and is
naturally more connected with the content and the
newspaper. [Disadvantages] However, the secrecy stops the employees from any
kind of democratic participation. The owner becomes liable for the debts and
losses and the rate of success depends entirely on his ability. There is less scope
for expansion and unlimited responsibility.
Partnership Ownership Pattern – As per the Partnership act 1932, Partnership
is defined as ‘ the relationship between persons who have agreed to share profits
of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. The minimum limit is 2
partners while the maximum is set to 20 partners. There are 2 kinds of partnership
– General and Limited. In India, Red Chilies Entertainment is an example of
Partnership. It is a motion picture production and distribution company, it is
headed by Shah Rukh Khan and Gauri Khan and operates under various divisions
like Film Production, VFX, Television shows, TVC production and the IPL Team,
KKR. Sanjiv Chawla is the executive producer while SRK and Gauri are the
chairman and chairwoman respectively. Venky Mysore took over the CEO a few
years back. [Advantages] In this kind of partnership, responsibility, maintenance
and operation cost can be divided. People with different talents come together and
pitch in their ideas and solutions which helps in the growth of the company and
also sets a democratic environment for all. [Disadvantages] In a partnership,
selfish motives of a partner might harm the firm. Lack of unity and
misunderstandings might lead to losses after which each partner will have to incur
and pay back his share of debt. Also, there are chances of a partnership/ business
getting discontinued after the death of any partner.
Corporation – It is the one of the most common forms of ownership pattern. The
minimum numbers that can be a part of it are 5. It is an association of individuals
under the authority of the law, which has a continuous existence independent of
the existence of its members and powers and liabilities distinct of its members. The
BBC group is an example of a corporation. They are spread across web portals,
television and radio. Increasing capital can easily expand operations and transfer
of control is flexible. However cooperation taxes are imposed
Group/ Chain Ownership – This form of ownership is when two or ore same
mediums are handled by the same organization. They are formed without a
common holding but with a chain of command. Hindustan has 13 editions that are
printed in Hindu, under HT Media. Aaj Tak and Headlines Today are two different
channels but are held under the same organization i.e. India Today group. The
advantages of this kind of partnership are that financial, administrative and human
resources can be centrally managed. Because of this cost of production becomes
low due to best possible utilization of resources – this adds to better training, work
environment and more facilities being provided. However, permanence of
management is always in question because management is divided.
Employee Ownership Pattern – In this form of Partnership, employees own a
major part of the share. They are also responsible for the decision- making. E.g.:
Community Media like the Bangalore based advocacy group VOICES organized a
gathering of community radio stakeholders. During the inception 1996, a group of
radio broadcasters, policy planners, media professionals, and non-profit groups
joined hands to study how community radio could be relevant to India and what
policies were needed. They wanted All India Radio to allocate an hour of airtime
each day to community broadcasting [Advantages] In this, Employee issues can
be solved faster and it becomes easier to break interdepartmental barriers. Also,
the sense of ownership that the employees own helps the organization to grow
faster. [Disadvantages] However, it gets difficult to induct new people and
employees tend to get more preference than the benefit of the organization. It also
becomes difficult to take quick decisions.
Vertical Ownership Pattern- In this, an organization owns or operates different
media enterprises or some other enterprise under the same ownership. E.g: India
Today Group, Living Media or Big Media-Reliance group. The India Today Group
has Mail Today, Business Today, Aaj Tak and Headlines Today under itself –
making it a combination of magazines, newspapers and TV Channels, yet they still
fall under the same ownership i.e. the India Today Group. [Advantages] It helps
to promote different enterprises at the same time and reduced general expenses
but [Disadvantages] in this management may not be able to devote sufficient time
to any one particular media. Also, since the capital is invested in all media forms, a
particular media form might not get the attention that it ought to.
Prevalent Ownership Pattern – The 3 types of prevalent ownership patterns
are Conglomerate, Company and Trust.1. Conglomerate ownership Pattern – It
is a combination of two or more companies engaged in different business that fall
under one corporate structure. A Media Conglomerate is a multi industry company
that owns a large number of companies in various media such as TV, Radio, and
Internet etc. Examples are Viacom, Living Media Ltd., The Walt Disney Company,
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. Etc. Viacom is the fourth largest conglomerate in the
World after the Walt Disney, News Corporation and Time Warner. Viacom has its
assets in Nickelodeon, Paramount pictures, MTV, Comedy Central, VH1 etc.
Reliance Industries Limited are also an example of one of the most famous
conglomerates in India. [Advantages] – The Diversification results in reduction of
investment risk and creates an internal capital market. Also, the downturn suffered
by one subsidiary can be counterbalanced by another. [Disadvantages] However
a lack of focus and culture clashes can destroy the value. This form tends to have
extra layers of management, which increases the cost.
2. Company Ownership Pattern – In this type of ownership, the company owns the
media. The same company tends to have listed shares in the share market. For eg:
HT media has shares in BSE, NSE, KK Birla Group has 69% stake in HT Media, HT
manages newspaper, radio etc. similarly, Reliance has a stake in GBN(Global
Broadcast News) which operates the English channel CNN-IBN and Hindi channel
IBN7.3. Trust ownership Pattern – A trust is a relationship whereby property (real
or personal, tangible or intangible) is held by one party for the benefit of another.
An example of this is the The Tribune Trust. It was founded on 2nd February 1881
by Mr. Sardar Singh Majithia and is run by a trust comprising of 5 trustees. It
enjoys worldwide circulation and publishes 2 other newspapers also – The Punjabi
Tribune and Dainik Tribune. This kind of partnership focus more on welfare and
not on profit making. Advantages of this ownership pattern are that it focuses on
real news rather than sensationalizing it. There are also not too many people which
result in lesser clashes and more harmony. However, they might face a shortage of
funds. Sometimes, it also takes time to reach the masses, as they don’t indulge in
promotional activities.
These ownership patterns decide the business models, profit engagement and the
content produced and distributed by the Media. Financial flows, recovery of costs
for creating, assembling and presenting the product are all determined by their
outcomes.

PRICE AND PAGE SCHEDULE ACT

Statement of Objects and Reasons.-The regulation of the prices of newspapers in relation to their
sizes appeared to be a necessity to the Press Commission mainly in order to provide the
circumstances in which freedom of opinion could be very much more real than it is today by
eliminating unfair competition and equalising opportunities for newspapers especially with
smaller resources. Accordingly, one of the major recommendations of the Press Commission was
that legislation be enacted empowering Government to issue from time to time a price-page
schedule fixing a minimum price at which papers of a particular size can be sold. The
Commission also recommended that in order to ensure that the reader gets an adequate
proportion of news and views and that the advertisements are not reduced in effectiveness
because there are too many of them, the total space allotted to advertisements in newspapers
should be restricted to a specified proportion. The consensus of opinion in the Press industry is in
favour of these recommendations and there has been a general demand for their implementation.
In the course of the debate on the Press Commission's Report general approval was expressed by
Parliament to the principles underlying these recommendations. The Bill seeks to implement the
recommendations by conferring powers suitably for the purpose.The scope of the Bill is
restricted to newspapers which appear at intervals of not more than a week. Clause 3 of the Bill
empowers Government to issue a price-page schedule from time to time by making an order
providing for the regulation of the prices charged for newspapers in relation to their maximum or
minimum number of pages, sizes or areas and for the space to be allotted for advertising matter
in relation to other matters. It is enjoined that such order shall be made with due regard to the
need for reasonable flexibility with reference to the fall of news, the flow of advertisements and
other matters connected with the normal working of newspapers. Similarly, provision has been
made for the schedule to be drawn up in consultation with the interests concerned. The other
provisions of the Bill mainly relate to procedure.[7th September, 1956]An Act to provide for the
regulation of the prices charged for newspapers in relation to their pages and of matters
connected therewith for the purpose of preventing unfair competition among newspapers so that
newspapers may have fuller opportunities of freedom of expression.Be it enacted by Parliament
in the Seventh Year of the Republic of India as follows:-
1. Short title, extent and duration .-(1) This Act may be called The
Newspaper (Price and Page) Act, 1956.

(2)It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.[* * *]
2. Definitions .-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

(a)"daily newspaper" means a newspaper which is published on not less than six days in a week,
and includes any supplement or special edition of such newspaper;(b)"newspaper" means any
printed periodical work containing public news or comments on public news appearing at
intervals of not more than a week.
3. Power to regulate prices and pages of newspapers, etc .-(1) If the
Central Government is of opinion that for the purpose of preventing unfair
competition among newspapers so that newspapers generally and in
particular, newspapers with smaller resources and those published in
Indian languages may have fuller opportunities of freedom of expression,
it is necessary or expedient so to do, the Central Government may, from
time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, make an [order]

providing for the regulation of the prices charged for newspapers in relation to their maximum or
minimum number of pages, sizes or areas and for the space to be allotted for advertising matter
in relation to other matters therein.(2)An order under this section-(a)may be made in relation to
newspapers generally or in relation to any class of newspapers;(b)may contain different
provisions for daily newspapers and newspapers appearing at other periodical intervals and for
different classes of newspapers, and may, in particular, make separate provisions for weekly
editions of daily newspapers whether appearing under the same title or not, and also for
supplements or special editions of newspapers issued on special occasions;(c)shall be made
relatable to such period of time as the Central Government may deem reasonable;(d)may provide
for incidental or supplementary matters.(3)An order under this section shall be made with due
regard to the need for reasonable flexibility with reference to the fall of news, the flow of
advertisements and other matters connected with the normal working of newspapers.(4)Before
making any order under this section, the Central Government shall consult associations of
publishers, and such publishers likely to be affected by the order as it may think fit with respect
to the action proposed to be taken.
4. Prohibition of publication and sale of newspapers in contravention of
order under section 3.-No newspaper shall be published or sold in the
territories to which this Act extends in contravention of any of the
provisions of an order made under section 3.
5. Returns to be furnished by newspapers .-For the purpose of verifying
whether an order made under section 3 is being complied with or not, the
Press Registrar appointed under the Press and Registration of Books Act,
1867 (25 of 1867), may, from time to time, direct the publisher of any
newspaper to which such an order applies to furnish to him such weekly
returns and statistics with respect to any of the particulars referred to in
section 3 as the Press Registrar may, from time to time, require and the
publisher of every newspaper shall comply with such direction.

6. Penalties .-(1) If any newspaper is published or sold in contravention of

section 4, the publisher of the newspaper shall, on first conviction, be
punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees and on any
second or subsequent conviction, with fine which may extend to two
thousand rupees.

(2)If the publisher of any newspaper-(a)refuses or neglects to comply with any direction of the
Press Registrar given under section 5; or(b)furnishes or causes to be furnished to the Press
Registrar any weekly returns or statistics which he has reason to believe to be false, he shall be
punishable with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees.
7. [ Cognizance of offences

.-No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act except upon a
complaint in writing by the Press Registrar appointed under the Press and Registration of Books
Act, 1867 (25 of 1867), or by any officer authorised by him in writing in this behalf.
Sl.N Name of Residential and professional Qualification Area in which he is authorized to Remarks
o notary address s practice

SEDITION LAWS

Historical Background of Sedition Law: Sedition laws were enacted in 17 century England when
lawmakers believed that only good opinions of the government should survive, as bad opinions
were detrimental to the government and monarchy. The law was originally drafted in 1837 by
Thomas Macaulay, the British historian-politician, but was inexplicably omitted when the Indian
Penal Code (IPC) was enacted in 1860. Section 124A was inserted in 1870 by an amendment
introduced by Sir James Stephen when it felt the need for a specific section to deal with the
offence. It was one of the many draconian laws enacted to stifle any voices of dissent at that
time. th 2/5 Sedition Law Today: Sedition is a crime under Section 124A of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC). Section 124A IPC: It defines sedition as an offence committed when "any person by
words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, 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". Disaffection includes disloyalty and all feelings of
enmity. However, comments without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or
disaffection, will not constitute an offence under this section. Punishment for the Offence of
Sedition: Sedition is a non-bailable offence. Punishment under the Section 124A ranges from
imprisonment up to three years to a life term, to which fine may be added. A person charged
under this law is barred from a government job. They have to live without their passport and
must produce themselves in the court at all times as and when required. 3/5 Major Supreme
Court Decisions on Sedition Law: The SC highlighted debates over sedition in 1950 in its
decisions in Brij Bhushan vs the State of Delhi and Romesh Thappar vs the State of Madras. In
these cases, the court held that a law which restricted speech on the ground that it would disturb
public order was unconstitutional. It also held that disturbing the public order will mean nothing
less than endangering the foundations of the State or threatening its overthrow. Thus, these
decisions prompted the First Constitution Amendment, where Article 19 (2) was rewritten to
replace “undermining the security of the State” with “in the interest of public order”. In 1962, the
SC decided on the constitutionality of Section 124A in Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar. It
upheld the constitutionality of sedition, but limited its application to “acts involving intention or
tendency to create disorder, or disturbance of law and order, or incitement to violence”. It
distinguished these from “very strong speech” or the use of “vigorous words” strongly critical of
the government. In 1995, the SC, in Balwant Singh vs State of Punjab, held that mere
sloganeering which evoked no public response did not amount to sedition. Arguments in Support
of Section 124A: Section 124A of the IPC has its utility in combating anti-national, secessionist
and terrorist elements. It protects the elected government from attempts to overthrow the
government with violence and illegal means. The continued existence of the government
established by law is an essential condition of the stability of the State. If contempt of court
invites penal action, contempt of government should also attract punishment. Many districts in
different states face a maoist insurgency and rebel groups virtually run a parallel administration.
These groups openly advocate the overthrow of the state government by revolution. Against this
backdrop, the abolition of Section 124A would be ill-advised merely because it has been
wrongly invoked in some highly publicized cases. 4/5 Arguments against Section 124A: Section
124A is a relic of colonial legacy and unsuited in a democracy. It is a constraint on the legitimate
exercise of constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and expression. Dissent and criticism
of the government are essential ingredients of robust public debate in a vibrant democracy. They
should not be constructed as sedition. Right to question, criticize and change rulers is very
fundamental to the idea of democracy. The British, who introduced sedition to oppress Indians,
have themselves abolished the law in their country. There is no reason why India should not
abolish this section. The terms used under Section 124A like 'disaffection' are vague and subject
to different interpretations to the whims and fancies of the investigating officers. IPC and
Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 2019 have provisions that penalize "disrupting the public
order" or "overthrowing the government with violence and illegal means". These are sufficient
for protecting national integrity. There is no need for Section 124A. The sedition law is being
misused as a tool to persecute political dissent. A wide and concentrated executive discretion is
inbuilt into it which permits the blatant abuse. In 1979, India ratified the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which sets forth internationally recognized standards for
the protection of freedom of expression. However, misuse of sedition and arbitrary slapping of
charges are inconsistent with India's international commitments. Way Forward India is the
largest democracy of the world and the right to free speech and expression is an essential
ingredient of democracy. The expression or thought that is not in consonance with the policy of
the government of the day should not be considered as sedition. Section 124A should not be
misused as a tool to curb free speech. The SC caveat, given in Kedar Nath case, on prosecution
under the law can check its misuse. It needs to be examined under the changed facts and
circumstances and also on the anvil of ever-evolving tests of necessity, proportionality and
arbitrariness. The higher judiciary should use its supervisory powers to sensitize the magistracy
and police to the constitutional provisions protecting free speech. The definition of sedition
should be narrowed down, to include only the issues pertaining to the territorial integrity of India
as well as the sovereignty of the country. 5/5 The word ‘sedition’ is extremely nuanced and
needs to be applied with caution. It is like a cannon that ought not to be used to shoot a mouse;
but the arsenal also demands possession of cannons, mostly as a deterrent, and on occasion for
shooting.

CENSORSHIP OF FILMS AND PRESS

I. INTRODUCTION We are in the 21st Century which saw certain scientific and
innovative innovations in the field of literature, science, technology and other related
fields. In fact we carried on this process of progress which the society witnessed in
the later part of the 20th century. After hard struggles for freedom and in the era of
independence, we marched side by side with the developed and developing countries
and had left a mark for ourselves. We have contributed significantly to the all-round
development of the country in almost all the fields. Art and literature is one such area
where perhaps no other country could show the development like we contributed.
From the very ancient times we were known for our culture, for our art and literature
and for our religious developments and contributions. Films which form a very basic
part of the art and literature also saw dramatic developments. In the meantime Indian
cinema has completed hundred years of its existence and going strong in spreading
the message of rich cultural, social, economic and political heritage of this great
country. Film is a medium which touches the minds of the millions of people by
spreading its base both in rural and urban areas. Contribution of Indian cinema in the
growth and development of Indian society is outstanding and unparallel. It is an
established fact that the Constitution of India guarantees a bunch of rights to the
citizens. These rights also include certain fundamental freedoms. So far as films are
concerned, any individual is at liberty to make a film and exhibit it anywhere in India.
But like other freedoms, this freedom is also not absolute. It is also subject to certain
restrictions as mentioned in our Constitution. [1] We also have a specific law [2] to
see that the film adheres to the norms prescribed by it before it gets approval for
public viewing.

II. FREEDOM TO EXHIBIT FILMS But as compared to the freedom guaranteed to the
films, the Press enjoys a bit more because the film is subject to censorship as
provided in the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Press is immune from such censorship
although immediately after independence and thereafter attempts were made by the
Government to impose certain restrictions on the Press, the Supreme Court negated
all such attempts. The films are treated differently from the Press so far as pre-
censorship or censorship is concerned. Therefore, a difference of opinion persists in
the academic circles why censorship for films and not for the Press. The Supreme
Court has tried to a great extent to solve this issue. Let us discuss both the aspects
separately and also the provisions laid down in the legislation. III. CENSORSHIP OF
FILMS Films are considered as a great medium of communication with the people.
With the development and progress of the society and also with the progress in the
field of science and technology the films have undergone a sea change and by
adopting all the available technologies have been able to reach the masses and also
significantly contributed to the social and cultural development of the country. In this
way the films are equated with the Press as Press is also considered as a great medium
of communication. Both the films and the Press enjoy the same status and right so far
as constitutional freedom relating to expression of ideas and spreading of ideas and
messages are concerned. As is known Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees
freedom of speech and expression which is extended to the Press also. Therefore,
both these mediums are regulated under this provision of the Constitution.
Simultaneously as these freedoms are not absolute and subject to constitutional
restrictions, both these mediums are also to adhere to this. As mentioned above, we
have the Cinematograph Act, 1952 to see the films fulfill the norms prescribed by the
law. The Act provides for the establishment of a 'Central Board of Film Certification',
the regulatory body for films in India to issue the certificate to the makers of the film
for public exhibition. As per the provision of the law, the Board after examining the
film or having it examined could (a) sanction the film for unrestricted public
exhibition; (b) sanction the film for public exhibition restricted to adults; (c) direct
such excisions and modifications in the film before sanctioning the film to any
unrestricted public exhibition or for public exhibition restricted to adults; and (d)
refuse to sanction the film for public exhibition. K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, [3] is
perhaps the first case where the question relating to the censorship of films arises. In
this case, the Supreme Court considered important question relating to pre-censorship
of cinematograph films in relation to the fundamental right of freedom of speech and
expression conferred by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The petitioner in this
case challenged the decision of the Board of Film Censors in refusing a 'U‟ certificate
[4] for him film "A Tale of Four Cities". While the case was pending in the Supreme
Court, the Central Government to grant the „U‟ certificate provided certain cuts were
made in the film. As the petitioner‟s grievance was completely redressed, the
petitioner applied for an amendment enabling him to raise the question of pre-
censorship in general, in order that persons who invested money in making films may
have guidance on this important constitutional question. The amendment sought by
the petition was allowed for consideration by the apex court. The following two
issues were before the court for consideration: (a) that pre-censorship itself cannot be
tolerated under the freedom of speech and expression; and (b) that even if it were a
legitimate restraint on the freedom, it must be exercised on very definite principles
which leave no room for arbitrary action. Taking into consideration all these,
Hidayatullah, C.J. made it clear that censorship of films including precensorship was
constitutionally valid in India as it was a reasonable restriction within the ambit of
Article 19(2). It was also observed that pre-censorship was but an aspect of
censorship and bore the same relationship in quality to the material as censorship
after the motion picture has had a run. However, censorship should not be exercised
as to cause unreasonable restrictions on the freedom of expression. Holding the view
that "precensorship was only an aspect of censorship and censorship of
cinematograph film was 'universal', Hidayatullah, C.J. went on to observe that "it had
been almost universally recognized that motion pictures must be treated differently
from other forms of art and expression, because a motion picture's instant appeal both
to the sight and to hearing, and because a motion picture had become more true to life
than even the theatre or any other form of artistic representation. Its effect,
particularly on children and immature adolescents was great." The court upheld the
general principles which had been laid down for the guidance of the censors and said
that the test of obscenity and principles laid down in Udeshi's case [5] applied mutatis
mutandis to an obscene cinematograph film. In S. Rangrajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram [6]
the Supreme Court again confronted the question of censorship of films vis-a-vis
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. In this case, the Madras High Court revoked the
`U' certificate issued to a film entitled "Ore Oru Gramathile" ("In Just One Village"),
and also banned the exhibition of the film as there was some public protest against the
film. The film was critical of the reservation policy of the Government of Tamil
Nadu. During the pendency of the case, the film received the National Award by the
Directorate of Film Festival of the Government of India. After the decision of the
Madras High Court, the matter went to the Supreme Court on an appeal and the court
reiterated the importance of the freedom of speech and expression and the role of
films as a legitimate media for its exercise. The Court was of the opinion that "if
exhibition of the film cannot be validly restricted under Article 19(2), it cannot be
suppressed on account of threat of demonstration and precessions or threat of
violence. That would tantamount to negation of the Rule of Law and surrender to
blackmail and intimidation. It is the duty of the State to protect the freedom of
expression since it is a liberty guaranteed to handle the hostile audience problem. It is
its obligatory duty to prevent it and protect the freedom of expression” [7] Again in
Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, [8] case, better known as the Bandit
Queen case, the Supreme Court considering the censorship issue upheld the freedom
of expression through films and removed the restrictions imposed on the exhibition of
the film "Bandit Queen" [9] on the ground of obscenity. In this case, the petitioner
Om Pal Singh Hoon filed a petition asking the court to quash the certificate of
exhibition for screening the film "Bandit Queen" and also to restrain its exhibition in
India. It was contended in the petition that the depiction of the life story of Phoolan
Devi in this film was "abhorrent and unconscionable and a slur on the womanhood of
India." The way the rape scenes were depicted and the manner in which such scenes
were picturised was also questioned and it was also contended that the depiction of
Gujjar community in those scenes amounts to moral depravity of that particular
community. The Delhi High Court quashed the order of the Tribunal granting 'A'
certificate to the film on the ground that the rape scenes were obscene. When the
matter went to the Supreme Court by way of appeal, allowing the appeal, the
Supreme Court reversed the decision of the High Court and upheld the decision of the
Tribunal in granting the 'A' certificate to be valid. The court was of the opinion that:

"The film must be judged in its entirety from the point of overall impact. Where
theme of the film is to condemn degradation, violence and rape on women, scenes of
nudity and rape and use of expletives to advance the message intended by the film by
arousing a sense of revulsion against the perpetrators and pity for the victim is
permissible.” [10] The court rejecting the challenge under the provisions of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952 went on to observe that: “We do not censor to protect the
pervert or to assuage the susceptibilities of the over sensitive. „Bandit Queen' tells a
powerful human story and to that story the scene of Phoolan Devi's enforced naked
parade is central. It helps to explain why Phoolan Devi became what she did, her rage
and vendetta against the society that had heaped indignities upon her.”[11] IV.
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CENSORSHIP UNDER ARTICLE 19(1)(A) The
Supreme Court for the first time came across the issue of censorship of films under
Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India, in K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, [12] in
this case the Supreme Court upheld the censor of films on the ground that films have
to be treated separately from other forms of art and expression because a motion
picture is able to stir up emotions more deeply than any other product of art. A film
can therefore, be censored on the grounds mentioned in Article 19(2) of the
Constitution. The Supreme Court held the view that "censorship of films, their
classification according to the age groups and their suitability for unrestricted
exhibition with or without excisions is regarded as a valid exercise of power in the
interest of public morality, decency etc. This is not to be construed as necessarily
offending the freedom of speech and expression.” [13] Further the Court held that:
“Censorship in India (and pre-censorship is not different in quality) has full
justification in the field of the exhibition in cinema films. We need not generalise
about other forms of speech and expression here for each such fundamental right has
a different content and importance. The censorship imposed on the making and
exhibition of films is in the interest of society. If the regulations venture into
something which goes beyond this legitimate opening the restrictions, they can be
questioned on the ground that a legitimate power is being abused. We hold, therefore,
that censorship of films including prior restraint is justified under our Constitution.”
[14] Constitutionality of censorship was also held in S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan
Ram. [15] The case came to the Supreme Court in an appeal relating to the revocation
of `U' certificate to a Tamil film. Reversing the judgment of the Madras High Court,
the Supreme Court opined that: "Though movie enjoys the guarantee under Article
19(1)(a) but there is one significant difference between the movies and the other
modes of communication. Movie motivates thought and action and assures a high
degree of attention and retention. In view of the scientific improvements in
photography and production the present movie is a powerful means of
communication. It has a unique capacity to disturb and arouse feelings. It has as much
potential for evil as it has good. It has an equal potential to instill or cultivate violent
or good behaviour. With these qualities and since it caters for mass audience who are
generally not selective about what they watch, the movie cannot be equated with
other modes of communication. It cannot be allowed to function in a free market
place just as does the newspapers and magazines. Censorship by prior restraint is,
therefore, not only desirable but also necessary.”

V. WHY CENSORSHIP OF FILMS, NOT THE PRES After discussing in detail

about the censorship of films, one question automatically comes to our mind, i.e. why
censorship of films, not the press? This question was dominating the Indian scenario
for quite a long period. To find a clear cut answer we have to take in to consideration
several other factors and aspects along with some of the important decisions of the
Supreme Court. The freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under our
Constitution most probably draws its inspiration from the First Amendment of the
American Constitution. The First Amendment which deals with freedom of the press
is as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
Press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government
for a redress of grievances.” The American Supreme Court in Associated Press v.
U.S., [17] referring to the First Amendment observed that: “it is the purpose of the
First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited market place of ideas in which truth will
ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolisatation of that market
whether it be by the Government itself or a private licensee.” If we analyse the
American First Amendment it is clear that in the first place it advocates for the
freedom of the press, and secondly no restrictions are imposed on the freedom of the
press. But on the other hand Article 19 (1) (a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees to
all the citizens the right to „freedom of speech and expression‟ and this freedom
includes the right to express one‟s own views and opinions at any issue through any
medium he likes. This right also includes the freedom of the press or the freedom of
the communication and the right to propagate or publish opinion. But unlike
American Constitution, this freedom is not absolute, and is subject to restrictions
imposed by Article 19 (2) of the Constitution. Despite the restrictions, in our country
the citizens and the press in real practice enjoy this freedom to a large extent because
in a democratic set up, such freedoms are necessary and quite helpful for the proper
functioning of the democratic process. It has been rightly remarked by Justice
Bhagawati in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [18] in the following words:
“Democracy is based essentially on free debate and open discussion, for that it is the
only corrective of Government action in a democratic set up. If democracy means
Government of the people, by the people, it is obvious that every citizen must be
entitled to participate in the democratic process and in order to enable him to
intelligently exercise his right of making choice, free and general discussion of public
matters is absolutely essential”. It is clear now that the freedom of press certainly
enjoys importance in our democratic process as it seeks to advance public opinion
and matters of public interest by publishing it which enables them to form a
responsible judgment. Our Supreme Court through various judgments also upheld the
dignity of the press and freedom it enjoys by nullifying the attempts to put a curb on
it. Accordingly imposition of pre-censorship on a newspaper as held in Brj Bhusan
case, [19] or prohibiting the newspaper from publishing its own views as in Virendra,
[20] or imposing a ban on the entry of newspapers and its circulation as in Sakal
Papers case, [21] and in Romesh Thapper case, [22] or trying to put restrictions in
some way or other in Express News paper case [23] and the Bennett and Coleman
case, [24] were held by the Supreme Court as encroachment in freedom of speech and
expression and opposed to Article 19 (1) (a).

VI. CONCLUSION In K.A. Abbas v. Union of India [28] the Supreme Court opining
that “the films have to be treated separately from other forms of art and expression
because a Motion Picture is able to stir up emotion more deeply than any other
product of art” [29] upheld that the films are subject to censorship on the grounds
mentioned under Article 19 (2). Thus censorship is permitted mainly on social
interests specified under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution with emphasis on
maintenance of values and standards of society. The Court further went on to observe
that “…censorship in India (and pre-censorship is not different in quality) has full
 justification in the field of exhibition of cinema films. We need not generalize about
other forms of speech and expression here for each such fundamental right has a
different content and importance. The censorship imposed on the making and
exhibition of films is in the interest of the society. If the regulations venture into
something which goes beyond this legitimate opening to restrictions, they can be
questioned on the ground that a legitimate power is being abused. We hold, therefore,
that censorship of films including prior restraint is justified under our Constitution.”
[30] Similarly in S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagajivan Ram [31] the Supreme Court justified
the pre-censorship by expressing the view that “though movie enjoys the guarantee
under Article 19(1) (a) but there is one significant difference between the movie and
other modes of communication. Movie motivates thought and action and assures a
high degree of attention and retention. It has a unique capacity to disturb and arouse
feelings. IT has as much potential for evil as it has for good. With these qualities and
since it caters for mass audience who are generally not selective about what they
watch, the movie cannot be allowed to function in a free market place just as does the
newspapers and magazines. Censorship by prior restraint is, therefore, not only
desirable but also necessary.” [32] Further referring to the film producers right to
express his own opinion and project the message he wants in connection with the
film, the Court opined that the State cannot prevent open discussion open expression
of views and then went on to observe that: “In a democracy it is not necessary that
everyone should sing the same song. Freedom of expression is the rule and it is
generally taken for granted. Everyone has a fundamental right to form his own
opinion on any issue of general concern. He can form and inform by any legitimate
means.” Thus in the interest of the society restrictions can be imposed. But it was
clarified by the Court that when there is a conflict between the freedom of expression
and the restrictions, there should be a compromise between the interest of freedom of
expression and special interests. Now it is clear that films cannot be equated with
other modes of communication.

CENSORSHIP AND CINEMATOGRAPHY IN INDIA

What is censorship?
The definition of censorship lies in the example of a man expressing his opinion, thoughts or ideas,
orally or in writing. It can be expressed in a public place or a place where he is publicly visible, or
through an electronic medium such as press, social media, movies or a literary piece. The opinions are
such that causes disturbance of public morality, promotes obscenity and hampers peace. The
censorship is imposed by a public authority to restrict the man from the expression of such opinions
that have the ability to cause negative consequences.

Censorship is a reasonable restriction imposed by the competent authorities on the general public for a
reasonable suppression on the right to freedom of speech and expression. The restrictions provided
under Article 19(2) of the Constitution are factors on which censorship can be placed on the free
expression of opinions, thoughts or ideas.

History and origin of censorship in India

Censorship laws was implemented in India in 1918, at a moment when the British rulers were
adamant that film should serve, unwaveringly, their colonial objectives. At the time, there was no local
movie industry, and the canons of regulation targeted films all of which were brought from the western
country, particularly the United States. The British wished for these films to portray a positive image of
the west and the intensions of Europeans in the colonies, which was their goal.

The Regional Censor Boards, established in 1920 and “theoretically independent, had comprehensive
instructions on ‘sensitive topics,’ ‘objectionable subjects,’ and ‘forbidden scenes’ in ‘foreign’ films – a
term for pictures from the United States – before them. The regime, on the other hand, was not
immune to the prospect that an Indian film industry may emerge at some point in the future and cause
them much more concern.”

To prepare for such a scenario, the police commissioners of Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, Rangoon, and
Lahore placed the Provincial Censorship Boards under their control. The bureaucracy began to connect
itself more with censorship decisions and make its presence apparent in key censorship concerns by
the mid-1920s, as an indigenous cinema industry began to show indications of growth, as provided for
in the Indian Cinematograph Act 1918.

The goal was twofold: to intimidate the boards into submission while also subjugating the unrestricted
growth of subject and substance inside the young cinema industry, both of which were accomplished.

Eventually, the frequency of bureaucratic intrusions lessened, but only because the film censorship
system had been sufficiently obedient to the government’s wishes by that point. “In order to maintain
complete bureaucratic control over the situation, the censorship judgments were rendered non-
justiciable, meaning that they could not be challenged in court.”

Censorship of films before to India’s independence India has demonstrated three fundamental
characteristics:- In order to “to deny the Indian audience any access to communist or socialist ideals
(‘propaganda’ in administrative language) reflected in the Soviet cinema, to ensure that the spirit of
freedom and independence did not reach the audience of a colonised country regularly through the
American films, and to prevent the crystallisation of nationalist paradigm in the Indian cinema.”

It is important, though, that the British authorities sought to emphasise “audience safety and the
avoidance of demeaning or moral acts” in order to cover up their true, political, goals.

There was absolutely no need for the rulers of independent India to continue this heritage in their own
right. However, they shocked the world when they decided to keep the postcolonial censorship system.
It was eventually revealed that it was effectively an usurpation in preparation for a future
reconstruction project.

Although there has been no alteration in ‘official’ perception of the film medium, there has also been
no advancement in it. In addition, the formulation of a “political” view, which was diametrically
opposed to that which had evolved during the colonial period, made matters more complex. “The new-
found rhetoric about reasoning, freedom, due process, right, modernism, development and growth
displayed by the nationalist leaders of India with gay abandon, were not acceptable to the film
censorship machinery.”

In the new period, cinema remained exposed to political malice as well as administrative influences.
However, the way in which these unfavourable opinions were expressed was diametrically opposed to
that of the colonial era.

Censorship of films after independence

In 1948, the Board of Film Censors in Bombay and Madras released a so-called “Production Code,”
which provided motion picture producers with guidelines on how to make feature films. This was the
first significant reform in Indian film censorship procedures following Independence.
The Code was ostensibly created to ensure that cinema performs its rightful role in the development of
a healthy public culture. Furthermore, “the Bombay Home Minister, who had lobbied for a mechanism
such as a Production Code, recommended that film scripts be presented to censorship agencies prior
to the start of movie productions.”

Because the film industry was clearly aware of the pernicious and shrouded repercussions of these
efforts at direct and indirect censorship, it reacted by rejecting openly the recommendation for the
submission of scripts in advance and by giving only tacit acceptance to suggestions made by the
Production Code.

Following that, many legal changes were made to the then-current administrative structure and nature
of cinema censorship, which had been formed under the terms of the 1918 Cinematograph Act, which
was passed in 1919.

After the Cinematograph (Amendment) Act of 1949, two new censorship certificate classifications were
formed: a “A” certification that limited cinema viewing to adults over the age of 18, and a “U”
certification that indicated the picture was appropriate for unrestrained public display. In India, “this
was the first time a system of film censorship based on audience age was employed. The
Cinematograph (2nd Amendment) Act of 1949 was the last piece of legislation to execute the
recommendation of the Indian Cinematograph Commission of 1927-28 for the establishment of a
Central Board of Film.”

If the former was marked by compulsion or even outright repression, the latter was characterised by a
certain speed and deft manoeuvrability. “The post-colonial film control system was complete by 1952.
After a series of arguments, movements and countermoves, it was decided that the system of cinema
censorship should be reoriented in the post-independence period. “

The film industry has been pushing for a centralised system of film censorship since the interim
administration (1945-47), presumably to eliminate regional variations in censorship decisions. At the
time, the business was gradually being dominated by ‘independent’ manufacturers.

Because of this, they frequently had access to questionable sources of funding and engaged in risky
investments with the hope of making a quick profit. The distribution and exhibition industries too had
their fair share of competitors. All of them engaged in speculative activity, frequently in flagrant
violation of established market regulations. They finally drove out most of the traditional operators,
causing anarchy and disruption in the industry as a whole, as well as contaminating the atmosphere.

A great deal of the work produced by the so-called “independent” producers was crammed with
elements that were intended to appeal to a broad audience. So, they begged with the censors for a
“slight” leniency in keeping with the spirit of liberation that pervaded the country. And their demand
for a centralised censor board was a ruse to ensure that any potential impediments that their films
could encounter were kept to a minimum. Their demands also included a prohibition on the provincial
government revising such a body “unless there is a severe threat to public safety.”

Rule of law
The imposition of censorship follows the doctrine of the rule of law, which is the basis of determining
the constitutional validity of any administrative action. The doctrine of the rule of law states that every
administrative action must be undertaken following due procedure established by law.

The censorship falls within the right to freedom of speech and expression, due to lack of any clarity
over medium of communication of ideas in the clause of Article 19(1)(a). The fundamental rights are
not absolute in nature and hence, reasonable restrictions are impediment to this right. The censorship
process, intra vires to the provisions of the restrictions provided under Article 19(2), are valid in
consonance to the doctrine of rule of law.
Censorship of movies and related legislation
The practice of censoring movies to remove any objectionable material by the Censor Board has been
followed in India. It is to make the movie suitable for the target audience. The viewership is based on
the certificate issued to every movie prescribing the audience that can watch the movie. Historically,
controversial topics such as communal disharmony showcased in the movies have led to the issue of
censorship by the Board.

There are certain legislations in India dealing with censorship in movies to reach the satisfactory level
of public morality or other reasonable restrictions. The competent authority is entrusted with the
responsibility to watch the movie and make suitable suggestions to the makers before issuing the
acceptance certificate to release the movie.

The Cinematograph Act, 1952

The Indian film industry is the largest in the world with multiple movies releasing every week across
lakhs of cinema halls. The legislation exclusively deals with censorship of movies in India with respect
to certain rules and regulations established by law. The proper definitions of every word for the
purpose of the legislation is provided in Section 2.

The certification, Censor Board establishment, and scope of such Board is provided in this legislation.
In such regard, ‘cinematograph’ is defined as any apparatus of visual representation in motion or
series of pictures, ‘adult’ has been taken as any person who has completed eighteen years of age.

Establishment of Board
Section 3 of the Act states that the Central Government has the authority to constitute a Board of Film
Certification consisting of a Chairman and other members. The Board is established to watch the pre-
released movies and sanction them suitable for public exhibition.

The Central Government has the power to decide the salary of the Chairman of the Board, and the
members receiving salaries according to the meetings’ attendance of the Board.

Examination of films
Section 4 of the Act states the procedure to examine the films by the Board before the release. The
Board follows a prescribed procedure where the person with the intention to release any film provides
an application to the Board for a certificate after an examination of that film through screening by the
Board.

The film is sanctioned for public exhibition after the complete examination process is achieved. It also
provides a sanction for movies according to the target audience that involves viewership restricted on
the basis of the content of the movie. It involves movies restricted to adults exclusively. The Board has
the authority to make modifications in the film that it deems fit before sanctioning the movie for public
exhibition. It can directly refuse the movie from public exhibition as well.

All the actions by the Board can be taken after providing a fair chance to the maker of the movie to
explain his views on the matter.

Advisory panels
Section 5 of the Act provides the Central Government with the power to establish advisory panels at
regional centres to assist the Board in the discharge of their duties. The membership is based on the
discretion of the government with each member qualified to evaluate the effectiveness of every movie
on the public.

The number of regional officers at a regional centre is not specified in the provisions of the legislation,
thus, the government is at the liberty to appoint as many as it thinks fit. The rules shall be made in
such a manner that associates the regional officers in the examination process of the films. The Board
can consult the advisory panels with respect to any film. The advisory panels are endowed with the
duty to examine the films and make recommendations to the Board according to the rules made on
this behalf.

The advisory panel members are not entitled to any salaries but are provided fees and allowances as
prescribed.

Films certification
Section 5A of the Act provides the method of certification of the films after examination in the
prescribed manner. There are various certifications issued to a movie by the Board according to the
contents of the movie being suitable for a particular target audience. In this regard, the ‘U’ certificate
is granted in case the movie is applicable for unrestricted exhibition, or a ‘UA’ certificate is issued for a
movie that is unrestricted exhibition except for children below 12 years of age.

The other certifications sanctioned to a movie include an ‘A’ certificate and an ‘S’ certificate as per the
restrictions for the audience. ‘A’ certificate signifies that the movie can be viewed by adults-only, while
the ‘S’ certificate is an indication of the movie being restricted to a certain class of persons. Every
order of the Board in respect to the certification of a film shall be published in the Gazette of India.

Guidance in the certification of films

Section 5B of the Act states the powers of the Board or any other authority issuing the certificate to
the film, is of the opinion that the film violates the national interest of the country in regards to the
sovereignty and integrity of India, or effects the friendly relations with other states, public order,
morality, decency or defamation or contempt of court or any incitement to the commission of an
offence.

The Central Government carries the authority to issue directions to the authority sanctioning
certificates to films in relation to sanctioning public exhibition.

Landmark judgements on censorship of movies in India

S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram, 1989

In S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram, a film was issued a ‘U’ certificate by the Board until it was revoked
by the Madras High Court and also banned the public exhibition of that movie amid the protests
against it. The film dealt with a very sensitive topic of reservation policy in Tamil Nadu. The movie was
critically acclaimed as it received the National Award by the Directorate of Film Festival of the
Government of India.

The matter was heard by the Supreme Court on an appeal where it was observed that a movie cannot
be restricted from the public exhibition on the threat of demonstrations or protests by the general
public. These protests are beyond the reasonable restrictions placed under Article 19(2) of the
Constitution. A mere intimation of violence by the public shall not be a restriction on freedom of
speech and expression as it is a duty of the state to protect these fundamental rights at any cost.
Anand Patwardhan v. Central Board of Film Certification, 2003
A case regarding a filmmaker’s harassment by the Board. In Anand Patwardhan v. Central Board of
Film Certification, the Censor Board examined a film and ordered the filmmaker to carry out two cuts
and one addition for the movie to be eligible for a ‘U’ certificate. The petition was filed on the
directions of the Censor Board, where it was observed that the cuts ordered were an act of abuse of
power by the Censor Board to harass the filmmaker which was in violation of the right to speech and
expression through cinematograph under Article 19(1)a.

Sree Raghavendra Films v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, 1995

In another case, Sree Raghavendra Films v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, a film’s exhibition in the
Telugu language was suspended by the provisions under Section 8(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Cinemas
Regulation Act, 1955, even when the Censor Board sanctioned the unrestricted exhibition of the
movie. The reason behind the suspension was cited as it may hurt sentiments of certain communities.
The court observed that the authority that ordered the suspension did not even watch the movie and
hence, it quashed the order on grounds of arbitrariness.

Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, 1996

This case is better known as the Bandit Queen case. The Supreme Court while dealing with this case
once again upheld the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1) through cinematograph.
The court refused the restrictions on the exhibition of the film on grounds of obscenity. The petitioner
contended that the exhibition of the film shall be restricted for its nature of depiction of the life story of
a bandit, Phoolan Devi in the film and the picturisation of rape scenes were also questioned along with
the image of Gujjar community harmed with some particular scenes in the movie.

The Supreme Court observed that a film cannot be restricted simply because the content is obscene,
indecent or immoral. The abusive language or nudity in the movie was to further the case regarding
the depiction of the reality of the life story of Phoolan Devi. The movie was provided with the ‘A’
certification under Section 5(B) with restricted viewership for adults only.

Conclusion
A cinematograph is an art form that is used to express emotions, ideas, opinions and thoughts by an
individual. It is protected under freedom of speech and expression until a reasonable restriction is
placed on its enjoyment under the provisions of Article 19(2). The censorship is a process that is
explained in the Cinematograph Act, 1955 while providing the complete procedure. There are
numerous landmark judgements in this regard which have mostly arisen out of a conflict between the
fundamental right to speech and expression and the restrictions imposed in consonance with the
restrictions enshrined in the Constitution for the right. It is a very delicate matter as it is the obligation
of the state to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens and every action while sanctioning the
censorship shall be equivalent to the reasonable restrictions.

COMMERCIAL ADVERTIZEMENTS

Introduction to Advertisements
Advertisements are the method of promoting the sale, generally used to promote marketing
strategically. One should not get confused between advertisement and propaganda; propaganda is
what the governments use to promote their policies. Advertisement can be done by both printed and
digital methods. Television, radio, newspaper, internet all can be used for the purpose of
advertisement. According to a survey, an average of 600 US billion dollars is used worldwide in
advertisements.

Human civilization has seen a different form of advertisements right from the ancient period. Wall
paintings, announcements, campaign displays were the form of advertisement during the ancient
times. These methods are however even now being used in some parts of Asia. With modernisation,
new methods of advertisements have been introduced. However several issues of misuse of
advertisements have been observed, and this has forced the governments all around the world to
enforce strict laws to keep a check upon misuse of advertisements. This article is trying to explain how
the advertising law works in India and what organization is responsible for keeping a check on it.

Advertising laws in India

In the previous few years, advertisement in India has seen the vast transformation. From the
Doordarshan and Prasar Bharti way of advertising to the modern television channel and media,
however with increasing misuse such as promoting a prohibited medicine, promotion of alcohol,
promotion of toxic substance such as cigarette tobacco, etc. forced the government to pass several
laws to keep in check such sought of advertisements. Let’s take a look at the several legislations that
are responsible for controlling misleading advertisements:

 Press Council of India Act, 1978

 Cable television regulation act, 1955 and Cable television amendment act, 2006
 Establishment of the ASCI (Advertisement standard council of India), 1985
The Advertising Standard Council of India was established as a nonstatutory tribunal. It created a self-
regulated mechanism of introducing the advertising ethics in India. The ASCI judges the
advertisements based upon its Code of Advertising Practice, also known as the ASCI code. This Code
applies to advertisements read, heard or viewed in India even if they originate or are published abroad
so long as they are directed to consumers in India or are exposed to a significant number of consumers
in India.

Survey of FICCI regarding functioning of self regulation in

advertising
To understand whether the ASCI is functioning properly or whether the guidelines of ASCI are sufficient
enough to check the misleading advertisements, FICCI sent a questionnaire to all the top-tier official
advertising managements. To mention a few, the questionnaire was sent to:

 Advertising agencies
 Advertisers
 BTL agencies
 Government
 Market research
 Marketing Institutes
 Media
The findings of the survey on self regulation of advertising
According to the survey, it was found out that among the sectors as mentioned above, 31% believed
that the ASCI framework is ok and enough to act and check upon the advertisements. They believed
that very limited instances where the ASCI had failed to perform adequately. 13% believed that the
ASCI framework is adequate but needs some reforms so as to be more effective. While shockingly a
56% believed the framework to be inadequate and ineffective. They said that there is not enough
knowledge among the stakeholders regarding the regulatory mechanism and process of complaint
making. They also indicated that there are ads which making false claims, and there is no medical
research to substantiate the claim. The message is not conveyed in the right spirit, and the present
framework is not addressing this.

Laws and acts governing advertisement

In India several laws and acts related to advertisement control. Let’s mention a few of them.

 The consumer protection Act, 1986 and advertising

The Section 6 of this Act grants consumers the right to be informed about the quality, quantity,
potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services, as the case may be to protect the consumer
against unfair trade practices. Section 2(r) of the Act, under the definition the term “unfair trade
practice”, it also covers the gamut of false advertisements including misrepresentations or false
allurements. And to redress against such unfair trade practices on false advertisements may be sought
under the Act.

 The cable television network Act, 1995&

the Cable Television Amendment Act, 2006
and advertising
Section 6 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulations) Act, 1995 provides that no person shall send
or transmit through a cable service any advertisement unless such advertisement is in conformity with
the advertisement code prescribed under the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2006.
However, the provision above does not apply to programs of foreign satellite channels which can be
received without the use of any specialized gadgets or decoder.

Also the Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2006 lays down the “Advertising
Code” for cable services which have been formulated to conform to the laws of the country and
to ensure that advertisements do not offend morality, decency and religious susceptibilities of the
subscribers.

 Restrictions on advertising under the Cigarettes and other

Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and
 Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply,
and Distribution) Act, 2003
Section 5 of this Act, prohibits both direct & indirect advertisement of tobacco products in all forms of
audio, visual and print media.

 Advertising regulations under Drug and Magic Remedies

Act, 1954 & Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940
This Act is for regulating the advertisements of drugs in certain cases and to prohibit the advertising
for certain purposes of remedies alleged to have magic qualities and to give for matters connected
therewith; – Section 29 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act,1940 imposes a penalty upon whoever uses
any report of a test or analysis made by the Central Drugs Laboratory or by a Government Analyst, or
any extract from such report, for the purpose of advertising any drug. The punishment prescribed for
such an offense is fine which may extend up to five hundred rupees and imprisonment up to ten years
upon subsequent conviction.

 Advertising restrictions under Prenatal Diagnostic

Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act,
1994 & Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1956
Advertisement in any manner regarding facilities of pre-natal determination of sex available at any
genetic counselling centre, laboratory, clinic or any other place is prohibited under this Act and has
been made a punishable offence under the Act (Section 22); – Section 3 of the young person harmful
Publication Act,1956, inter alia, imposes penalty for advertising or making known by any means
whatsoever that any harmful publication (as defined in the Act) can be procured from or through any
person.

 The Indian Penal Code and criminality of

advertisements:
The IPC, vide an array of provisions, prohibits obscene, defamatory publication, publication of a lottery
and statements creating or promoting disharmony/ enmity in the society. While it is not implicitly
written, any advertisement that related to an offence, like hiring a contract killer or inciting violence,
terrorism or a crime is illegal and will be punished under IPC or other applicable provisions.

Summary of advertisement laws in India

As a summary of the advertisement acts in India, it can be virtually said that various laws about
advertisement in general and those relating to specific sectors and malpractices have created a sense
of fear in minds of those who use wrong methods of advertising unethical materials. However, the
absence of a single statutory, regulatory body further aggravates the problem. A comprehensive law/
regulation on advertising in all forms of media which shall provide clarity in the matter and act as a
one-stop window for all matters relating to advertising is highly desirable. The advertising sector needs
to be ethical, which means they should not be advertising just for the sake of profit motives rather it
must follow some ethics. Public advertisements of alcohol, cigarette and other health-harming
products, unnatural medicines, etc. should be avoided.

The advertisement makers must follow the following ethical values:

 Should be true.
 Must not be illegal.
 Must not misguide the society, especially children.
It must be however the duty of the related authorities to offer a safeguard against the violators. The
aim of such bodies must be as follows:

 To provide a safeguard against the indiscriminate use of advertising for the promotion of
products which are regarded as hazardous to society or people to a degree or of a type that
is not acceptable for the society at large.
 To ensure that advertisements observe fairness in the competition so that the consumer’s
need to be informed of choices in the marketplace and the canons of generally accepted
competitive behaviour in business is both served.
 No advertisement shall be permitted that derides any race, caste, nationality. Also, such
advertisements must be avoided which is against the constitution of India, presents
criminality as desirable, exploits national emblem or security.
Well, it was once famously said that advertising was legalised way of lying. This reflects the dilemma
of advertising and its effect on consumers. In an environment of jealous competition in the foreground
of a market economy, advertisements often tend to exaggerate and misrepresent facts which
ultimately affect impressionable minds. This is exactly what all legal systems including India must
seek to address.

JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DOORDARSHAN’S DECISION TO TELECAST

Judicial background of Right to Broadcast:

Indian constitution has provided the Indian citizens with fundamental rights and one of these rights is Right to free speech
and expression which is covered under article 19(1)(a). The right to free Speech and expression is also expanding and
evolving with the developing modes of communications.

Broadcasting is also a recently developed and effective mode of communication like internet and other e-communications
so, it is also covered under article 19(1)(a).

Following are the cases when right to broadcast is recognized judicially:

 Odyssey Communications (P) Ltd. v. Lokvidayan Sangatana[4]:

The petitioner in this case objected to the airing of the Honi Anhoni television series on the channel Doordarshan
because he believed it promoted superstition and blind faith in the public. As a result of the petitioner's inability to
provide any evidence that could prove that the society had suffered any harm, the petition was rejected.

The Supreme Court ruled that viewers have the freedom to show films on Doordarshan as long as they abide by
the channel's rules and regulations. In accordance with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, broadcasting is a part of
the fundamental right to freedom of expression and may only be restricted within the terms of Article 19(2) that is
reasonable restrictions on Article 19(1).

The court determined that this right is quite comparable to a citizen's freedom to express his or her opinions
through any other medium, such as newspapers, periodicals, holdings for advertisements, etc.
  LIC v. Manubhai D. Shah[5:

Right to broadcast was also recognized in this case. The challenge in this case was Doordarshan's reluctance to
air the documentary "Beyond Genocide" about the Bhopal gas tragedy." Doordarshan declined to air the movie for
a number of reasons, including that it was out of date, no longer relevant, lacked moderation and restraint, was
unfair and unbalanced, political parties were bringing up a number of issues related to the tragedy, the victims'
claims for compensation were still pending, the movie would likely stir up trouble in an already tense environment,
and it criticised the state government's actions.

The Supreme Court ruled that Doordarshan, a state-controlled organisation that relied on public finances, was not
permitted to refuse to air the movie since it was unable to present a convincing justification under Article 19(2) of
the Constitution, upholding the right to broadcast.

 The Secretary, Ministry of Information v. Cricket Association of Bengal & Anr.[6]:

The cricket association's right to offer television rights to a particular agency was at issue in this case. According to
article 19(1)(a), the right to be amused and to be amused, in this case via broadcast media, is an essential aspect
of freedom. This freedom depends in large part on the circulation and dissemination of knowledge, and television,
which has the largest audience possible, is a crucial medium for communication.

The Supreme Court held that broadcasting is a means of communication and the medium of speech and
expression within the framework of article 19(1)(a). The court continued by ruling that the telecaster's right was
restricted because it depended on the use of the airwaves, a common property resource. Free access is limited by
the airwave spectrum that is available.

Government organisations may lawfully place restrictions on transmissions based on the accessibility of the
airwaves as well as the justifications provided under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. This restriction was not
applicable because the viewers' fundamental right to information, education, and entertainment was upheld.

 Directorate General of Doordarshan v. Anand Patwardhan[7]:

This case arose when Doordarshan refused to telecast respondent's documentary film titled Father, son and Holy
war. The documentary was the third of a respondent-produced trilogy that addressed communal violence.
Doordarshan declined to show the preceding films despite the fact that they had won national prizes, claiming that
doing so would lead to law and order issues.

The first two movies, whose telecast had been rejected by Doordarshan, were the ones to which the respondent
was successful in his challenge. The High Court's order mandating the telecast of the movie was affirmed by the
Supreme Court. It stated that because Doordarshan is a state-controlled organisation supported by public funds.

It is unable to reject the respondent's request to air a documentary film unless there are conditions which are laid
down in Article 19(2). Since Doordarshan is a national broadcaster and has power over the public's airwaves, it is
required to air a movie that addresses social injustices including caste, class, and violence against women.

All the above cases show that Right to broadcast is a fundamental right covered under Article 19(1)(a) of the
constitution. Since, it deals with public at large so there are also laws for regulating it and they have evolved with
time.

Evolution of Broadcasting Laws in India:

The introduction of broadcasting technology in India occurred before independence, and as a result, the laws governing
wireless and radio transmission predate the establishment of an independent Indian government.

 Pre Independence:
The Telegraph Act, 1885 was the first piece of legislation of significance. Government control over the installation,
upkeep, and operation of wireless equipment was granted by this statute. The central government of India shall
have the sole right to establish, maintain, and operate telegraphs[8], said the act.
 The Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 was passed in 1933 to address the situation of radio receivers and wireless
operators, who were not covered by the Telegraph Act of 1885. The new law made using a radio set without a
licence illegal.

Radio was the only form of broadcasting at first. The Indian Broadcasting Company, founded in 1927, launched the
nation's first radio service, operating stations in Bombay, Calcutta, and Lahore until going out of business in March
1930. Soon after, the Government of India assumed direct control over broadcasting, and the service designated
as the Indian state broadcasting service started transmitting. By 1932's end, the British broadcasting service
started transmitting to the empire. This shows that in the earlier days the government had the monopoly over the
broadcasting.

The Indian government's state broadcasting service was then renamed All India Radio in 1936, and the following
year it was moved from the department of labour to the department of communications. The department of
information and broadcasting was established in 1941, and after the country gained its independence in 1947, it
became the ministry of information and broadcasting.

 Post-Independence:
After the independence and formation of constitution in 1950, A system for film censorship was put in place when
The Cinematograph act, 1952 was created. Two distinct concerns were covered in it:

1. Evaluating and approving movies as suitable for exhibition.

2. Regulation of movie theatres, including licencing.

Some provisions of this act were under the central list, some under state list while some under the concurrent list. The act of
1952 was passed to establish a distinct line of demarcation between the laws pertaining to the licencing and control of films
as a state issue and the provisions relating to the sanctioning of pictures for public display, a union matter. The Censor
board or Board of Film Certification was established by the statute. All the films that are to be exhibited must obtain
certification from this board.

TV had only been available in Delhi since 1959, and Bombay only got it in 1972. It was expanded to border towns like
Srinagar and Amritsar in 1973 in an effort to counteract the effect of Pakistani TV, which was already available in those
sensitive border regions. In the Kashmir valley, 250 TV receivers were soon installed in villages. Government viewpoints on
social and political topics were broadcast on television.

Television was grossly abused during the 1975 emergency, and as a result, there was a call for its autonomy after the
emergency. Then, following the emergency and the election of the first non-Congress government, the government
displayed a white paper on the improper use of the media during the emergency.

This was given before parliament at the conclusion of the formation of a working committee to examine the autonomy of
Akashvani and Doordarshan within the framework of the government. This was India's first concentrated effort at
broadcasting reform. The working committee suggested that a trust should be established called Akash Bharti, or national
broadcasting trust. A bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha, however it expired with the 1979 dissolution of the Lok Sabha.

This bill was rejected by the Indira Gandhi administration when it took back office in 1980 on the grounds that "such an
organisation is not regarded required to enable those mass media to perform their core aim of serving people who are not
serviced by other media." A report titled "new policy for broadcast media" was published by the Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting in May 1982.

This was the end result of recommendations made for the restructuring of various media organisations by an advisory
committee led by G. Parthasarathi. The rules addressed news selection and presentation, political coverage, statements and
retorts, strikes, riots and disturbances, sex and crime, national tragedies, deaths and anniversaries, external news,
subversion and insurgency, comments, opinion, speculation, and rumour.

In 1989, when a non-Congress government took office, the concept of Akash Bharti was revived. In 1989, a bill known as
Prasar Bharati was introduced in the legislature. A board of governors was intended to oversee Prasar Bharati like a
company. The item and Akash Bharti's were fairly similar.

However, the proposal does not include the provision that guarantees the freedom of speech and expression as well as the
independence, impartiality, and integrity of the nation's broadcasting. When it was finally passed in 1990, it wasn't exactly
how it had been intended. The bill established a parliamentary committee to oversee the corporation's operations and
required it to report back to the legislature.
There were 22 members total on the committee, with 15 coming from the Lok Sabha and the remaining 7 from the Rajya
Sabha. The major responsibility of the corporation is to organise and operate public broadcasting service to inform, educate,
and entertain the people as well as to ensure a balanced development of broadcasting on radio and television, according to
Section 12 of the Prasar Bharti Act of 1990. This Act didn't talk about the autonomy of the broadcasting which was later
notified by a congress government in 1997.

For many years following the nation's independence, the government had authority over the broadcasting industry. In
actuality, radio and television were exploited as a voice for the political party in power, despite the fact that they are still
government monopolies that are purportedly in place for national development and the greater good.

After the country's borders were opened to foreign investment in 1991, the Indian Airtime Committee was established in
September 1992 to look into the best ways to provide commercial broadcasters access to the electronic media. This was a
step in the direction of privatisation because it allowed private producers to produce for Doordarshan, but the committee's
recommendations were not implemented. Additionally, many satellite-based TV services were introduced, and Doordarshan
was surpassed by technological advancements.

Zee TV, a Hindi satellite station that became a rival to Doordarshan, was one of many new satellite-based TV providers. The
Metro Channel, the government's first entertainment channel, was launched in response to the competition. There were up
to 12 satellite-based channels available in India by the end of 1995.

Because the government had monopolised the right to uplink from within the country for its own broadcasting organisations,
all of the services were uplinkeded from outside of India. The increase of private channels amounted to little less than a
revolution. In addition to providing options for entertainment services, the expansion of private channels opened up millions
of new job opportunities.

The government's initial response to the invasion of its satellites was one of reluctance. It was neither forbidden nor
approved by the government. The growth of cable TV was entirely unplanned and the outcome of local youth enterprise. The
government played no part in it. The government did nothing to stop the transmission or control its content. This may have
been due to the government's utter inability to enforce its ban on terrestrial redistribution services.

Cable services were not regulated until the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act,1995 was passed. However, the
scope of this Act was limited to regulating cable operators and did not cover telecasting rights.

Legislation governing cable networks was made possible by a Rajasthan High Court ruling. The case Shiv Cable TV
System v. State of Rajasthan[9] was filed when a district administrator ordered the local police to stop a cable TV network
because the operator did not have the necessary licenses.

The district administration's order was contested by the affected operators in the Rajasthan High Court on the grounds that
there was no law requiring them to obtain licences for their networks. They claimed that the district administration's actions
went against their fundamental right to operate their businesses and trades.

The state government said that in order for the cable operators to lawfully run their networks, they had to seek licences
under the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933. The High Court upheld that argument and
determined that the dish antenna used by the cable operator qualified as a wireless telegraphy device under the Wireless
Telegraph Act, 1933 because it could receive transient images of stationary and moving objects from satellites.

It was decided that a wireless licence was necessary for the operation of the dish antenna unless it was exempted. The
cable operators had to maintain statutory licences in order for their dish antennas to download programmes from satellites
and to transmit downloaded programmes through their network to customers, according to the court's ruling, which stated
that lines and cables in a cable network were covered by the definition of a telegraph line under the Telegraph Act, 1885.

Despite so coming to the conclusion, the High Court annulled the district administration's challenged orders because they
were made without jurisdiction. It was determined that only the director general of posts and telegraphs, a central
government official, was authorised to take the contested action under the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Wireless Telegraphy
Act, 1933.

The High Court determined that there were no regulations for cable networks set forth by the government. The court urged
the government to establish a licencing system to control cable networks after concluding that an outright ban on them
would be difficult given how quickly they had expanded.

Because of this ruling, an ordinance that provided a legal foundation for regulating cable networks was passed in 1994. The
Cable Television Networks Regulation Act, 1995 was subsequently passed after the ordinance was approved by parliament.
This was changed in 2003 to mandate the use of CASs by cable subscribers in order to access premium channels. The goal
of the new telecom policy of 1999 was to bring the cable industry and the market for communication services closer
together[10].

Along with fixed and cellular licensees, it designated cable operators as access providers. The provision of last-mile
connectivity, switched services, and one-way entertainment services by cable providers in their individual service areas was
made possible. Within their service region, cable operators are permitted to share infrastructure and connect directly to other
service providers.

Later in February 1995 Supreme Court of India gave a landmark judgement in The Hero Cup Case (Ministry of Information
and broadcasting v. cricket association of Bengal) When the Cricket Association of Bengal decided to host an international
tournament in honour of their diamond jubilee, they approached Doordarshan to make the necessary arrangements for the
game to be televised in India. They also requested a signal for foreign television, but Doordarshan rejected their request.

This was contested in front of The Supreme Court on the grounds that it violated the fundamental right to free speech and
expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. In response, the Apex court ruled that the government did not
have a monopoly on electronic media. The Supreme Court also heard that the right to telecast was covered by Article 19(1)
(a), that the airwaves are public property, and that they should be used for the benefit of the public. It also ordered the
creation of a separate body for controlling of airwaves.

Modern Scenario:
Today, the major bodies controlling broadcasting in India are: Ministry of I&B, TRAI and CBFC. Following are the description
of these authorities.

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting which is a ministerial-level government organisation in India that is in charge of
creating and enforcing legislation in the fields of information, broadcasting, the press, and Indian cinema.

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) whose objective is to is to provide a fair and transparent policy environment
which promotes a level playing field and facilitates fair competition. It was established by The Telecom Regulatory Authority
of India Act, 1997, an Act of Parliament, with effect from February 20, 1997, to oversee telecom services, including the fixing
or revising of telecom service tariffs that had previously been under the control of the Central Government.

A Telecommunications Dispute Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) was established to take over the adjudicatory
and disputes functions from TRAI, and the TRAI Act was amended by an ordinance, which became effective on January 24,
2000. TDSAT was established to hear and decide appeals against any directive, judgement, or order of TRAI as well as to
settle disputes between a licensor and a licensee, between two or more service providers, and between a service provider
and a group of customers[11].

Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC)[12] which is also known as the Censor Board and whose job it is to certify that
feature films, short films, trailers, documentaries, and theatre-based advertising are appropriate for public viewing through
screening and rating. It was created by the Cinematography Act 1952.

In the contemporary times television and cinemas are not the only ways at disposal for broadcasting, after the arrival of the
internet there are many contents accessible to large masses on the internet and to publish any content on the internet there
is no need of any licence, all a person need is an internet connection and account on the platform. So, it becomes difficult for
the government to regulate such content.

OTT (Over the top) platforms are one such new platforms which were not much regulated by the government and since
unregulated power can become boon for the nation the government decided to come up with something to regulate this
platform. In 2021 the Ministry of I&B introduced the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

This rule made it mandatory for the intermediaries to avoid harmful and hateful content form being published, anything which
is libellous or defamatory should be removed and people have a tribunal to file their grievances. So, after this OTT platforms
are also in check from doing anything which could possibly harm the tranquillity of the country.

Conclusion:
We have seen that broadcasting is acknowledged as a fundamental right provided to every citizen by the Supreme Court of
India through many landmark cases. Although right to broadcast an fundamental right still it is a powerful tool so there have
been many laws to regulate it and they have kept on evolving from Telegraph Act 1855 to IT (Intermediary Guidelines and
Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

It has evolved from regulating telegraph to regulating OTT platforms on the internet. This is not the end of this evolution as
the society and technology is still continuously evolving and so will the laws to regulate them to meet the latest requirement
of the society.
Emotional Impact:
Visual Media: Visuals have a
potent emotional impact, as they
can convey emotions, storytelling,
and
human experiences effectively.
This can lead to a deeper
emotional connection with the
content.
Non-Visual Media: While non-visual
media can also evoke emotions
through language, voice
modulation, and storytelling, it
might be perceived as less
emotionally intense compared to
visually
immersive experiences.
Multitasking and Attention:
Visual Media: Visual media can be
demanding in terms of attention,
making it harder for individuals to
multitask while engaging with the
content.
Non-Visual Media: Non-visual
media allows for more flexibility in
multitasking since it primarily
involves