'Judges must protect Freedom of Speech Even if they don't like what was said': Supreme Court | Current Affairs | Vision IAS
MENU
Home

Periodically curated articles and updates on national and international developments relevant for UPSC Civil Services Examination.

Quick Links

High-quality MCQs and Mains Answer Writing to sharpen skills and reinforce learning every day.

Watch explainer and thematic concept-building videos under initiatives like Deep Dive, Master Classes, etc., on important UPSC topics.

ESC

In Imran Pratapgadhi vs. State of Gujarat, Court underscored the importance of protecting the freedom of speech and expression and reminded authorities of their duty to uphold the rights of persons expressing unpopular opinions.

  • Judgement came in response to an FIR filed against Rajya Sabha MP Imran Pratapgadh, alleging that the content incited enmity between communities (under Section 153A of IPC). 
  • The court found that Section 153A requires deliberate intent to promote hatred between communities.
    • Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023), Section 196 penalizes actions or speech that incite hatred or disharmony between different groups based on religion, race, language, or region, to maintain peace.

Constitutional provision w.r.t. Freedom of speech

  • Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression to all citizens. This right includes:
    • Expressing opinions and ideas freely.
    • The right to receive and impart information.
    • Freedom of the press.
    • Right to criticize the government and public figures.
  • However, reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) can be imposed on grounds of sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. 

Important Judicial Pronouncements

  • K.A. Abbas v. Union of India (1970):  A film's impact must be assessed as a whole on ordinary viewers.
  • Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): Freedom of thought and expression is fundamental to democracy.
  • Manzar Sayeed Khan & Patricia Mukhim v. State of Meghalaya (2021): Mens rea (intention) is crucial in cases under Section 153-A IPC.
Watch Video News Today

Explore Related Content

Discover more articles, videos, and terms related to this topic

RELATED VIDEOS

1
Lateral Entry

Lateral Entry

YouTube HD
Title is required. Maximum 500 characters.

Search Notes

Filter Notes

Loading your notes...
Searching your notes...
Loading more notes...
You've reached the end of your notes

No notes yet

Create your first note to get started.

No notes found

Try adjusting your search criteria or clear the search.

Saving...
Saved

Please select a subject.

Referenced Articles

linked

No references added yet

Subscribe for Premium Features