Freedom of Speech and Expression / Libertas Loquendi /

Freedom of Speech and Expression: The Cornerstone of Democracy

Freedom of speech and expression is the lifeblood of democratic governance. Without it, citizens cannot criticise government, the press cannot hold power accountable, ideas cannot compete in the marketplace, and democratic participation is meaningless. Article 19(1)(a) is available only to citizens (not all persons — unlike Article 21) and is subject to specified reasonable restrictions — the balance between free expression and legitimate State interests that constitutes the core of free speech jurisprudence.

What It Covers

The Supreme Court has interpreted Article 19(1)(a) to include: (a) the right to propagate or publish one's views; (b) freedom of the press — no prior restraint on publication; (c) the right to receive information (Reliance Petrochemicals v. Indian Express 1988); (d) commercial speech — advertisements are protected (Tata Press v. MTNL (1995) 5 SCC 139); (e) the right to silence — the right not to speak or salute (Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) 3 SCC 615 — students' right not to sing National Anthem upheld); and (f) internet access as a mode of exercise of free speech (Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637).

Reasonable Restrictions: Article 19(2)

Eight grounds of restriction are permitted: (1) sovereignty and integrity of India; (2) security of the State; (3) friendly relations with foreign States; (4) public order; (5) decency; (6) morality; (7) contempt of court; (8) defamation; and (9) incitement to an offence. Each restriction must be: (a) by law (not executive order); (b) 'reasonable' (proportionate, not excessive); and (c) in the interests of one of the specified grounds. Vague, overbroad laws restricting speech have been struck down — the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1 as being overbroad and constitutionally invalid.

Sedition: Now Section 152 BNS

The old sedition law (Section 124A IPC) criminalised speech exciting 'disaffection towards the Government.' In Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar AIR 1962 SC 955, the Supreme Court upheld sedition law while limiting it to speech that incites violence or has a proximate tendency to disturb public order. The Supreme Court in 2022 stayed all prosecutions under Section 124A IPC pending re-examination of the law. The BNS 2023 replaced Section 124A with Section 152 — criminalising acts that endanger sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. The scope and constitutionality of Section 152 is still being litigated.

“Freedom of speech is indispensable to a democratic society. It enables citizens to participate in political life, the press to hold power accountable, and ideas to compete freely. Without it, democracy is a formality without substance.”