Article 19 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 19 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 19(1)

19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc

(1) All citizens shall have the right

(a) to freedom of speech and expression;

(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;

(c) to form associations or unions;

(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;

(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and

(f) omitted

(g) to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business

Article 19(2) states that the government may impose reasonable restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression in the interest of the following factors;

1. Sovereignty and integrity of India

2. The security of the State,

3. Friendly relations with foreign States,

4. Public order,

5. Decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court

6. Defamation

7. Incitement to an offense

Amendment - 

Article 19 (1) (f):

This article was omitted by the 44th amendment of 1978 of the Indian Constitution. It guaranteed to the Indian citizens a right to acquire, hold and dispose of property which was not possible due to economic differences. 

Cases

https://legaldesire.com/10-landmark-judgements-relating-to-freedom-of-speech-in-india/

Prabha Dutt vs Union of India

The petitioner, Smt Prabha Dutt Chief reporter of Hindustan Times filed a petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution asking for a writ directing the respondent, the superintendent of Tihar Jail, to allow her to interview the two convicts named Billa and Ranga who are charged with a death sentence for an offense under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitions filed by them to the President of India for communication of the sentence are reported to have been rejected by the President recently.

The Supreme Court in this case directed the Superintendent of the Tihar Jail to allow the representatives of a few newspapers to interview two death sentence convicts under Article 19(1)(a) as “the right under Article 19(1)(a) is not an absolute right, nor indeed does it confer any right on the press to have an unrestricted access to means of information”

 R. Rajagopal vs State of Tamil Nadu

A prisoner named Auto Shankar, who was held for murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment and death sentence, wrote an autobiography when he was imprisoned. The book discussed his personal life and his relation with many senior police officials, lot of whom have said to be involved with him in many illegal acts. Before his death sentence, he handed over the book to his wife after informing the prison officials of the same and the wife gave the book to the petitioners i.e., the editor, the associate editor, the printer and the published of a Tamil Magazine, for its publication. The Inspector General, when he got to know about the book, wrote to the published stating that the contents of the book were false and untrue, and that the book was defamatory in nature and that strict legal action will be taken against them if they proceed with publishing the book. The Tamil Magazine editor filed a petition against the Inspector General of Prisons to prevent him from violating their and the prisoner’s right to freedom of speech and expression.

The Supreme Court in this case held that the magazine had the right to publish the autobiography written by the prisoner, without his consent or authorization. It held that the state cannot prevent the publication but may sue the plaintiff for defamation after the article is published, but they had no right to stop the petitioners from publishing the book. It held that every person has the right to publish his/her autobiography because of his/her fundamental rights under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution and hence, the case was in favor of the petitioners.