FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
 The concept of freedom of speech and expression has evolved over centuries, shaped by legal,
political, and philosophical developments. In ancient Greece, open discourse was highly valued, with
philosophers like Socrates advocating for truth and rational debate, though he was ultimately
executed for his views. The Roman Republic also upheld the idea of free expression to an extent,
particularly in political forums.
 During the medieval period, freedom of expression was largely restricted, with absolute monarchs
and religious authorities controlling speech. However, the Magna Carta (1215) in England was an
early document limiting arbitrary power, granting some rights to individuals. The Protestant
Reformation in the 16th century further challenged authority, with figures like Martin Luther using
the printing press to spread new ideas.
 In the 17th century, John Milton’s Areopagitica (1644) argued against censorship, advocating for a
free marketplace of ideas. England’s Bill of Rights (1689) later solidified protections for speech and
the press, influencing democratic developments worldwide.
 The 18th century saw significant advancements with the U.S. Bill of Rights (1791), which enshrined
free speech in the First Amendment. Similarly, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and
Citizen (1789) recognized freedom of expression as a fundamental right, reinforcing democratic
values.
 In colonial India, British authorities imposed strict laws restricting speech, such as the Vernacular
Press Act (1878) and the Indian Press Act (1910), suppressing nationalist movements. Leaders like
Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak used the press and public discourse to challenge British
rule, emphasizing the importance of free speech.
 Post-independence, India’s Constitution (1950) guaranteed freedom of speech and expression under
Article 19(1)(a), though with reasonable restrictions for sovereignty, security, public order, and
morality. Over time, Supreme Court judgments have shaped the interpretation of free speech,
balancing individual rights with societal needs.
Today, freedom of expression remains a cornerstone of democratic societies, continuing to evolve in
response to challenges such as hate speech, misinformation, and digital censorship.

Meaning of Freedom of Speech and Expression

The Constitution of India guarantees various fundamental rights to its citizens. One such important right is
right to freedom under Article 19. This includes right to freedom of speech and expression, right to assemble
peacefully and without arms, freedom to form associations and unions, right to move freely throughout the
territory of India, right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India and right to practice and
profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

Speech and expression mean- expression your views by way of words, articles, signs, representation, etc.
There can also be other way of expression, and all such medium shall be deemed to be expression.
‘Lawell Vs Giffin’ - numbers, signs, symbols, etc. were held to medium of expression.
‘Tata press Ltd. Vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.’ (A.I.R. 1995 S.C. 2438)- commercial speech and
expression shall be deemed to be part of speech and expression under Article 19(1) (a).
Romesh Thappar v State of Madras (AIR 1950 SC 124), the Supreme Court of India held that the
freedom of speech and expression includes freedom to propagate ideas which is ensured by freedom of
circulation of a publication, as publication is of little value without circulation.
Punishments for breach of privileges or contempt of the house
1. Imprisonment – If the breach committed is of a grave nature the, penalty will be given within the variety
of the imprisonment of any member or person.
2. Imposing fine – If within the view of the parliament, the breach or contempt committed is of economic
offence and any monetary gain has been made of the breach then, the parliament can impose fine on the
person.
3. Prosecuting the offenders – The parliament also can prosecute the one committing the breach.
4. Punishment given to its own members – If any contempt is committed by the members of the parliament
then, he is to be penalized by the house itself that might also result in the suspension of the member from the
house.

Powers of media article 361A

Article 361A provides qualified privilege to media for publishing the brief, accurate and fair reporting of the
proceedings, but it will not immune the media from the liability under contempt of House in case of breach
of privilege by the media. Article 361A is not an exception to the immunity guaranteed to the legislators
under Article 105(3) and 194(3).
Breach of any privileges of legislators the law of privileges affects the press and media. They may be either
liable for breach of privilege or contempt of house. The media persons may confront the following
problems.
1. Violation of any of the rules of procedures framed by the House.
2. Breach of any privileges of legislators
3. Publication of comments or other statements which undermine dignity of the House or shake the
confidence of the public in legislature, which can be punished as contempt of house.
According to the first possibility mentioned above,
I. the House has total control over the presence or otherwise of persons within the House.
II. It can regulate the entry of media persons into it. It can prohibit a part of proceedings from being
reported.
III. Press Gallery Committee decides the entry permissions to accredited journalists.
IV. It can be withdrawn or cancelled either by Chairman of Rajya Sabha or by Speaker of Lok Sabha.
V. If withdrawal is ordered under rule 387, disobedience may result in forcible withdrawal or arrest
and it may also constitute contempt.

In case of MSM Sharma v S. K.Sinha AIR 1959 SC 395

The editor of Search Light newspaper published an expunged remark from the proceedings of Bihar
Assembly, for which breach of privilege was issued. The Editor approached the Supreme Court under Article
32 contending that the notice of action under breach of privilege violates his fundamental right under Article
19(1)(a) and also interfere with his personal liberty under Article 21 if arrested in pursuance of the privilege
motion. The Supreme Court with majority opinion ruled that the Assembly had the right to claim the said
privilege under Article 194(3) of the Constitution as was enjoyed by House of Commons.

Sanjeeva Reddy Case:

The speaker of Lok Sabha Mr N. Sanjeeva Reddy has criticised the observations of Tej Kiran, who was the
follower and admirer of Jagadguru Shankaracharya Swamy of Govardhan Peeth Puri. It was reported that
Shankaracharya supported untouchability and walked out while National Anthem was played. On this, Mr
Sanjeeva Reddy, Y B Chawan and others made some strong remarks, which were complained to be
defamatory by Tej Kiran. The High Court rejected the plaint of Tej Kiran claiming Rs 26,000 as damages
from Sanjeeva Reddy and others for making defamatory remarks. The Supreme Court ruled that parliament
has complete immunity to make fearless remarks on any matter and the courts had no say in the matter.
 MEDIA AND CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT
Contempt of Court can be easily understood as when we are disrespectful or disobedience towards the court
of law which means that we wilfully fail to obey the court order or disrespect the legal authorities. Then the
judge has the right to impose sanctions such as fines or can send the contemnor to jail for a certain period of
time if he is found guilty of Contempt of Court.
In India, the concept of Contempt of Court is defined in Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
which has broadly described it as civil contempt or criminal contempt. There are two Articles in the
Constitution of India which talk about the Contempt of Court and these are Article 129 and Article 142(2).
Article 129 says that the Supreme Court shall be the ‘Court of Record’ and it has all the powers of such
courts including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
Article 142(2) says that the Supreme Court has all the power to make an order for securing any person’s
attendance, production of any documents or has the power to give punishment to anyone for its contempt.
Types of Contempt of Court in India
1. CIVIL CONTEMPT: Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 states Civil Contempt as
wilful disobedience to the order, decree, direction, any judgment or writ of the Court by any person or
wilfully breach of undertakings by a person given to a Court.
UTPAL KUMAR DAS V. COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KAMRUP
This is the case of non-rendering of assistance, although the court has ordered to render assistance. Decree
executed by the court to deliver immovable property but because of certain obstruction, the defendant failed
to do so. Hence, he was held liable for constituting disobedience to the orders of the competent Civil Court.

2. CRIMINAL CONTEMPT: According to Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, Criminal
Contempt is Defined as
(i) the publication of any matter by words, spoken or written, or by gesture, or by signs, or by
visible representation or
(ii) doing of any act which includes:
a) Scandalize or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any court, or
b) Biasness, interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any type of Judicial
proceedings, or
c) obstructs or tends to obstruct, interfere or tend to interfere with the administration of justice
in any manner.

The media, as a powerful institution in a democracy, plays a crucial role in shaping public perception of
judicial processes. However, when media coverage crosses certain legal thresholds, it can fall under criminal
contempt. This results in legal consequences that restrict media reporting and editorial freedom.

Contempt of Courts Act 1971

The Contempt of Court Act is a significant legal provision that ensures the judiciary’s authority is
maintained and that justice is administered fairly. However, its application often brings it into conflict with
the rights of the media, particularly concerning freedom of speech and expression. The Act seeks to balance
the need for a free press with the necessity of upholding the dignity of the judiciary and ensuring fair trials.

Where it doesn’t amount to Contempt of court?

(i)Innocent publication of a matter or its distribution does not amount to Contempt of Court.
(ii)Publishing of fair and accurate reports of the Judicial proceedings does not amount to Contempt of Court.
(iii)Fair criticism on judicial acts does not amount to Contempt of Court.
Regulation of media by the Contempt of Courts Act
1. Restrictions on Trial Reporting
The media is restricted from publishing content that could influence an ongoing trial, ensuring the right to a
fair hearing. In Sahara India Real Estate v. SEBI (2012), the Supreme Court held that courts could impose
temporary restrictions on media coverage if it could prejudice judicial proceedings.

2. Prohibition of Scandalizing the Court

Any publication that disrespects the judiciary or lowers its authority can be considered contempt. In Re: S.
Mulgaokar (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that criticism of the judiciary must be fair and constructive, but
malicious attacks could attract contempt charges. Similarly, in Prashant Bhushan Case (2020), the lawyer’s
tweets against the judiciary led to contempt proceedings.

3. Protection of Fair Trial Rights

Media should avoid speculative reporting or discussing sub judice matters. In A.K. Gopalan v. Noordeen
(1969), the court held that prejudicial publicity could deprive an accused of a fair trial.

4. Prohibition of Prejudicial Publications

Leaking confidential judicial material before verdicts can amount to contempt. The Arundhati Roy Case
(2002) highlighted that even public figures can be held liable for contempt if their statements disrupt judicial
processes.

The press and contempt of court:

 There have been cases that deal with both Art. 19(2) and the Act. One such case was Smt. Archana Guha
v. Sri Ranjit Guha, wherein the dispute was based on an article published in a Calcutta newspaper. It has
to be noted that the criticism of a judgement was done by distorting the facts, but the Calcutta HC held
that there was no contempt because there ought to be freedom to criticise the judiciary, even if done
incorrectly.
 This case brought forth the important point that there should not be any contempt case filed merely
because a particular judgement had been misconstrued in the media. An alternative remedy in the form of
clearing the confusion with the Registrar of the Press has been provided for the same.
 Media freedom is not curbed by imposing restrictions in the form of the Act. Rather, such restrictions
make us realise that no freedom is absolute.
 The Act in itself refers to contempt arising either as civil contempt or criminal contempt. Civil contempt
is understood as not abiding by the judgement, order, decree and other such matters of the Court, which
is not relevant in so far as the media is concerned. Criminal contempt refers to publication in any
medium that intends to reduce the authority of the Courts, interferes with any trial in the Courts, or
affects justice in any form. This criminal contempt is what acts as restriction on the freedom of the
media.
 These sections while explaining as to what contempt is, are vague in their wordings. Such vagueness
gives lot of power to the judges to ultimately decide when and how contempt proceedings can be
initiated.
 This power can be used arbitrarily by the Judges, especially in cases or situations when tempers run high
in the Court rooms. It can also reflect the problem of bias coming into play.
 Media houses – both print and TV channels – have been subject to contempt cases. In cases of speeches,
sermons or photographs also these principles are applicable.
 Some important cases are mentioned below:
 Publishing scandalous matter respecting the court after adjudication calculated to lower the authority of
the court and sense of confidence of the people in the administration of justice – B.K.Lala v R.C.Dutt
 Allegation that ‘justice is sold’ or ‘justice is auctioned’ Umed v. Bahadur Singh
 Allegation that a particular judge gives judgements or orders always in favour of the clients of a
particular advocate – State v Naranbhal
 P.N. Duda vs V. P. Shiv Shankar & Others In this case, the Supreme Court observed that the judges
cannot use the contempt jurisdiction for upholding their own dignity. Our country is the free marketplace
of ideas and no one could be restricted to criticise the judicial system unless this criticism hampers the
‘administration of justice’.

Interference by the Media

 The reason behind initiating contempt proceedings is not to restrict freedom of speech and expression but
to stop disruption to administration of justice. Sometimes due to over enthusiasm the media tends to
cross the limits by vigilant reporting in matters which are subjudice. This results in media trails, wrong
public opinion, giving away of misinformation. The important aspect of public faith in the justice of the
country gets affected.
 Sometimes extensive coverage during the trial can violate a person’s right to free trail. Right to Free trail
essentially means a trail without any extra pressure. In the Kathua gang rape case which happened in
January 2018, some media houses revealed the identity of the minor victim. The Delhi High court took
Suo moto cognizance and ordered those media houses to deposit ₹10 lakhs as penalty. Section 23 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 228A make revealing of identity of rape
victim a punishable offence.
 Another example which is of relevance here is of the accused of 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack. The
media channels even before the final judgement held debated and declared by itself that the accused will
be hanged to death. Such acts of the media lower the importance of the courts in the eyes of the people. It
is thus important for the courts to use contempt of courts proceedings as a shield against the interfering
acts of media to avoid violation of the accused and victim’s right to free trail and any serious risk of
prejudice.
 In the case of R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court stated that a report relating
to a subjudice matter can be published only after the prior consent of the courts or it would amount to
consequences. It also stated that due to provoking publications by media, regardless of the result, the
public will hold the accused guilty.

JUDICIAL REPORTING AND MEDIA

Judicial reporting refers to the coverage of court cases, trials, legal rulings, and other related legal events in
the media. A judicial reporter is responsible for attending court hearings, listening to arguments, analysing
legal documents, and then conveying this information to the public in a manner that is accurate, clear, and
respectful of legal proceedings. Unlike other forms of reporting, judicial reporting is deeply intertwined with
the law, requiring reporters to have a basic understanding of legal terminology, courtroom procedures, and
the broader legal framework.

Importance of Judicial Reporting

 Ensuring Transparency and Public Trust – Media coverage of judicial proceedings fosters public
confidence in the judiciary by making court processes more accessible and understandable. Open reporting
deters judicial corruption and ensures accountability.
 Legal Awareness – Judicial reporting educates citizens about their rights, significant legal precedents, and
legislative changes. This enables better civic participation and strengthens democratic values.
 Judicial Accountability – The media acts as a watchdog by exposing judicial inefficiencies, delays, or
potential biases in legal proceedings. Investigative journalism has historically played a role in
highlighting miscarriages of justice.
 Preventing Abuse of Power – Through responsible reporting, media ensures that both state institutions
and private entities remain subject to legal scrutiny.
Challenges in Judicial Reporting
1. Trial by Media
One of the most significant concerns is the trial by media, where excessive media scrutiny and
sensationalism can shape public perception before a court delivers its verdict. The Supreme Court, in
R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court (2009), held that media trials could impede fair trials by creating bias
among judges, jurors, or witnesses. Sensational reporting, especially in criminal cases, often presumes
guilt or innocence before judicial determination, violating the fundamental principle of "innocent until
proven guilty."

2. Contempt of Court
Under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, media cannot:
 Scandalize the judiciary – Making unfounded allegations against judges. (Re: S. Mulgaokar, 1978)
 Prejudice ongoing cases – Influencing judicial decisions before verdicts. (Sahara India Real Estate
v. SEBI, 2012)
 Obstruct justice – Publishing confidential court material. (Arundhati Roy Case, 2002)

3. Violation of Subjudice rule

Under the sub-judice rule, no one, including journalists, is allowed to comment publicly on a case
that is under trial. This is because any public statement could influence public opinion or the jury,
thus prejudicing the trial. Judicial reporters need to be extra cautious about discussing ongoing cases,
especially high-profile ones, in the media. Commenting on the merits of a case or making speculative
statements can result in legal action being taken against the media outlet or the reporter. This rule is
especially important in criminal cases, where the outcome can have significant consequences for the
accused and the justice system.
A.K. Gopalan v. Noordeen (1969) – The Supreme Court ruled that prejudicial reporting could deny
an accused a fair trial.

4. Impartiality and Objectivity

For example, sensationalist headlines or overly dramatic language can sway public opinion, even if
the actual case details are not as sensational. Therefore, judicial reporters must use neutral language
and present the facts in a straightforward manner that allows the public to form their own opinion
based on the evidence and legal arguments presented in court.

5. Defamation
6. Privacy Concerns
Courts sometimes deal with sensitive matters such as family law disputes, sexual assault cases, or
cases involving minors. Journalists should be careful not to expose any details that could identify or
harm the individuals involved. For example, publishing the name of a minor victim in a sexual assault
case is illegal in many countries, including India.
 OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT
The Official Secrets Act, 1923, deals broadly with the issue of spying and putting the country’s confidential
details at risk of revelation. This act divides secret information into official codes, passwords, sketch, plan,
model, article, document, etc, but it does not define what a “secret” document is. The Executive in Indian
Democracy is shielded by a special power to keep the information secret under the Official Secrets Act.
Though the Constitution speaks about freedom of speech and expression, it provides a form of the oath of
secrecy imposing an obligation on the constitutional office holders not to reveal information which they
come to know during the course of official functioning.

The relevant sections of the Official Secrets Act,1923 read as under:

 Section 3: If any person for any purpose approaches, inspects, passes over or approaches, inspects,
passes over or makes any sketch, plan, model, directly or indirectly, useful to an enemy or obtains,
collects, records or publishes or communicates to any other person any secret official code or password,
or any sketch, plan, model, article which is likely to affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security of the state or friendly relations with foreign states; He shall be punishable with imprisonment
for a term which may extend to fourteen years.
 Section 4: Defines a "foreign agent" as any person reasonably suspected of working for a foreign power
to obtain classified information. It also covers places suspected of being used for espionage.
 Section 5: Criminalizes the wrongful communication of information by government officials or other
persons who, due to their role, have access to confidential information. Any leak that is prejudicial to the
safety of the state is punishable.
 Section 6: Prohibits unauthorized access to restricted or prohibited areas, especially military installations.
Impersonating an official to gain access to such places is also punishable.
Controversies and Criticisms
1. Conflict with the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005
o OSA has been criticized for being a colonial-era law that promotes secrecy in government
operations.
o The RTI Act was introduced to ensure transparency in governance. Section 8(2) of RTI states
that public interest in disclosure can override OSA provisions unless it poses a threat to
national security.
o Section 22 of the RTI Act overrides any conflicting provisions in OSA, emphasizing
transparency over secrecy.
2. Lack of Clear Definition of "Secret Documents": The law gives the government unchecked power to
classify any document as "secret" without justification.
3. Freedom of Speech and Press
o Journalists have been targeted under OSA for publishing government documents.
o Cases such as The Hindu’s Rafale Deal Investigation brought OSA into public debate when
the government argued that leaked defence documents violated OSA.

4. Recommendations for Repeal or Reform

o 1971 Law Commission Report suggested that OSA should apply only in cases where national
security is genuinely threatened.
o Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) recommended repealing OSA and
merging it with the National Security Act.

Secrecy of Executive and Problems of Media

It is very difficult for the media to work for disseminating the information amidst so many laws creating iron
veils of secrecy.

Media and Secrecy of Jails:

Hussainara Khatoon I-VII54 These series of Hussainara Khatoon cases related to the illegal and prolonged
custody of poor under trials in the state of Bihar. In dealing with various aspects of bail, the Supreme Courts
stressed the need for free legal aid to the poor and needy who are not either not aware of the procedures or
not in a position to afford lawyers, and therefore unable to avail of the constitutional guarantees of legal help
and bail. The Court said, that it is the legal obligation of the judge or the magistrate before whom the
accused is produced to inform him that if he is unable to engage a lawyer on account of poverty or
indigence, he is entitled to free legal aid.

Access to places of custody and prisons:

Prabha Dutt Vs. Union of India - Media's access to the prisons is within the hands of executive.
Administrators of Jails generally resist the media's requests to interview the prisoners on extraneous excuses.
The Court held in this case that excepting there being clear evidence that the prisoners had refused to be
interviewed; there could be no reason for refusing permission to the media to interview prisoners in death
row. The right to acquire information includes the right to access sources of information.

Sheela Barse Vs. State of Maharashtra 56 - The Petitioner, a journalist, approached the courts to bring out
the condition of women prisoners in jails in the state of Maharashtra. These cases had come to her notice in
the course of interviewing women inmates in Bombay Central Jail. The court gave certain directions to the
State Government, including that pamphlet on the legal rights of arrested persons, in English, Hindi and
Marathi (the regional language of Maharashtra) should be printed in large numbers and circulated as well as
affixed in each cell in police lock up. Further, the Legal Aid Committee is to be immediately informed of the
arrest. There should be surprise visits to the police lock ups by a City Session Judge. The relative or friend
of the arrested person should immediately be informed upon the arrest. The magistrate before whom an
arrested person is produced should enquire from the arrested person whether he has any complaint of ill
treatment or torture in police custody and inform him of his right under the Criminal Procedure Code, to
have a medical examination.

The Right to Information Act, 2005 section 8 exemption of OSA

8. Exemption from disclosure of information. There shall be no obligation to give any citizen,—

(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to
incitement of an offence;
(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the
disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;
(c) information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State
Legislature;
(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of
which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that
larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied
that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(f) information received in confidence from foreign government;
(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify
the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes;
(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of
offenders;
(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other
officers: Provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons thereof, and the material on the
basis of which the decisions were taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken, and the
matter is complete, or over: Provided further that those matters which come under the exemptions specified
in this section shall not be disclosed;
PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA ACT, 1978

 Media is considered as the fourth pillar of democracy; it is the eyes and ears of this society and ideally
perform the function of a moral watchdog of the public interests. Correspondingly, proving to be the
interpreter between the public and different organs of our government. For the proper functioning of this
organ, it has to be independent and should be able to withstand the outside pressure and influence i.e.,
political parties and various other powerful organizations.
 Here comes into play the press council of India with the object of preserving the freedom of the press and
of maintaining and improving the standards of press in India. It is the autonomous, statutory quasi-
judicial body which was first constituted on 4th July, 1966 and started functioning from November 16 of
the same year (resulting in celebration of National Press Day on this date) by the Parliament on the
recommendations of the First Press Commission under the chairmanship of Justice J.R Mudholkar (then
a Judge of Supreme Court).

Composition of the Press Council of India

The 1965 Act provided for 25 members in the council which was changed to 28 members as per the act of
1978. The term of the Chairman and the members of the Council is 3 years.
Accordingly, it is a 28-member committee with the Chairman. The 28 members are as per the following
diagram:

Functions of the press council of India

• Helping newspapers in maintaining their independence;
• Building up a code of conduct for journalists and newspapers according to the high professional standards;
• Ensuring that the newspapers and journalists maintain high standards of public taste and foster a due sense
of both the rights and responsibilities of citizenship;
• Encouraging the growth of a sense of responsibility and public service among all those engaged in the
profession of journalism;
• Reviewing any development which is likely to restrict the supply and dissemination of news of public
interest and importance;
• Reviewing such cases where assistance has been received by any newspaper or news agency in India from
foreign sources, as are referred to it by the Central Government;
• Promoting the establishment of such common service for the supply and dissemination of news to
newspapers as may, from time to time, appear to it to be desirable;
• Providing facilities for the proper education and training of persons in the profession of journalism;
• Promoting the proper functional relationship among all classes of persons engaged in the production or
publication of newspapers;
• Studying developments that may lead towards monopoly or concentration of ownership of newspapers,
including a study of the ownership or financial structure of newspapers, and if necessary, to suggest
remedies.
• Promoting technical or another research. Powers of the Press Council of India
• Doing such other acts as may be incidental or conducive to the discharge of the above functions.

Press Council of India Complaint Procedure

• U/S 14 of PCI: Complaint against newspaper, editor or journalist:
• A complaint with the Press Council can be filed by any person, if there is a breach of the recognized ethical
standards of journalism by the publication or non-publication of a news-statement or article, cartoon,
advertisement, etc which is published in a newspaper.
• The complainant firstly has to write to the editor of the newspaper drawing his attention towards what the
complainant finds objectionable. This gives the editor the opportunity to deal with the matter and take the
necessary steps as in many cases the facts are usually misinterpreted by the complainant, or there is an error
which the editor is ready to admit and correct.
• If the Complainant is satisfied the matter ends here, but if he is not satisfied then he can take further steps
which is to refer to the Press Council.
• The complaint should contain the name and address of the editor, journalist or newspaper against whom the
complaint has been drawn along with this he has to state in what manner the particular news-article,
statement, cartoon, advertisement, etc is objectionable within the meaning of Press Council Act,1978 and
has to provide all the relevant particulars(copies of correspondence with the editor and a declaration that no
proceedings are pending in any court of law).
• As per the Press Council (Procedure for Inquiry) Regulations, 1979, the complaint has to be filed within
two months in the case of dailies, news agencies, and weeklies. In all the other cases it has to be filed within
four months.