Constitution of India: Is Pre-Censorship Legally Valid?

The Constitution of India grants citizens with the right of freedom of expression. However, censorship implies some form of restriction on speech, action or communication because it is considered harmful and objectionable by the authorized agency of the government. This has come under criticism from liberal thinkers, actors, authors, artists and others from across the world. Acclaimed Indian directors have constantly objected to any form of censorship in movies, books and artistic works.

In May 2010, the acclaimed political film Raajneeti faced censorship related difficulty as the censor board remained unsure of whether to give the movie a U or U/A certificate. There was also an allegation that the title of the movie had been lifted though Jha was quick to assert that he had registered the title five years back.  For most artists and movie makers, censorship is an arbitrary, policing tool used by the government to crush their bold endeavors to entertain the public. Let's have a look at the cases relating to pre-censorship.

Constitution of India: Validity of Pre-Censorship

In India, the question of validity of censorship arose in the case of Bennett Colman and Co. v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 106, when the complainant claimed that the Newsprint Order, which fixed the maximum number of publishable pages, violated the provisions of Article19 (1) (a) and 14 of the Constitution of India. Remember, these Articles respectively provide citizens with freedom of speech and expression and right to equality before law.

The government of India argued that the measure was taken to give an opportunity to small newspapers to grow and to prevent the monopoly of big newspaper companies. However, the court held that the News Print Policy violated the provisions of Article 19, of the Constitution of India and breached the plaintiff’s right of circulation and right of pages growth.

Further, the Court observed that freedom of press is both quantitative and qualitative and depends on both circulation and in content. The restriction on page limit will reduce the economic viability of the plaintiff and restrict its freedom of expression by reducing the area of news coverage.

Constitution of India:  Real Life Case Studies of Pre-Censorship

In a famous case, Odyssey Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. Lokvidayan Sanghatana, (1988) 3 SCC 410, a social group filed a lawsuit under Article 226, of the Constitution of India, to put a ban on the broadcast of the television serial ‘Hony Anhoni.’ Their reason was that the serial would spread superstitious beliefs among the public. The court ruled that the right to show films on Doordarshan in compliance to the terms and conditions laid down by the channel, is the right to freedom of expression of an individual provided by the Article 19 (1) (a), of the Constitution of India.