Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression
(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; (f) to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. (2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, insofar as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the 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.
Article 19 is the cornerstone of Indian democracy. Clause (1)(a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression — the right to express opinions freely through any medium. However, this right is not absolute. Clause (2) allows the state to impose 'reasonable restrictions' for reasons including national security, public order, decency, and morality. The six freedoms under Article 19 are: speech, peaceful assembly, forming associations, free movement, residence, and profession.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
2015The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act as unconstitutional for violating Article 19(1)(a).
Impact: Landmark victory for free speech online. The court held that vague and overbroad restrictions on speech cannot be justified under Article 19(2).
Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras
1950The Supreme Court held that freedom of speech is the foundation of democratic society and any restriction must be narrowly construed.
Impact: Established that the test for reasonable restrictions must be one of direct and proximate connection to the grounds listed in Article 19(2).
K.A. Abbas v. Union of India
1971The court upheld pre-censorship of films but held that it must be exercised within narrow bounds.
Impact: Recognized that different media may require different regulatory approaches while preserving the core of free expression.