Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. Freedom of speech which includes the right to freely express one’s convictions and opinions by word of mouth, writing, printing and all other means (addressed to the eyes or the ears), is a freedom guaranteed to citizens of India under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The rationale for protecting freedom of speech has been variously stated by eminent writers and statesman. T.I. Emersion has advanced four primary reasons: (i) As assuring individual self-fulfillment; (ii) As a means of attaining truth; (iii) As a means of securing participation by the members of the society in social and political decision making; and (iv) As maintaining balance between stability and change in the society.

2. But society cherishes other values to be attained. They are equally important. Impartial administration of justice and a right to presumption of innocence is one such value. The two interests i.e. interest of the society in freedom of speech and right to a fair and impartial administration of justice have to be balanced, for more often than not, they frequently clash with one another. The resolution of the two conflicts requires the identification of the core values of the two social interests, for only then, can the society harmonize the two.

3. Communication is the very essence of social life. It is difficult to imagine a civil society which has no expression. Faith in democracy is rested on the dictum: ‘Let people have the truth and freedom to discuss it and all will go well.’ The proponents of freedom of expression believe that if there is free trade in the market place of ideas, truth will grapple with falsehood and would ultimately prevail. Thus, they maintain that no fetters whatsoever and howsoever small can be put on freedom of speech.

4. T.I. Emersion holds the view that suppression of freedom of speech on the ground that it will promote justice is not within the competence of a good society (T.I.Emersion: ‘Towards a General Theory of First Amendment’ (1962-63) 72 Yale Law Journal at p.880).

5. On the other hand, John Rawls, in : ‘A Theory of Justice’ (1972 Oxford Paper Back 1973) p.302 argues that basic liberties are so important that consideration of other advantages can never in themselves be a justification for any derogation thereof.

6. Jacques Maritain, in: ‘Man and the State’ (1951; 1954) p.106-107 reflects the midpoint view; that by their very nature, no right is absolute. He maintains that conflicts between the various rights requiring reconciliation and that only when reconciliation cannot be effected, should one right i.e. the right to free speech be limited so as not to trample upon other rights.

7. In India, since we have a written Constitution, it is recognized that freedom of speech is not an absolute unlimited right. Article 19(2) provides reasonable restrictions on what is guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

8. Rule of Law is a pillar of a State. There cannot be a civilized society without a legal system. Not a weak and a limp legal system – it has to be an assertive legal system capable of upholding the majesty of the law. Civil societies have recognized that it is in the interest of not only an individual but also of the society as a whole that every member of the society gets a fair trial. Society recognizes that no one should be convicted except on a proper and a fair trial and according to law. Thus, a member of a society who is brought to justice, has a right ‘to have a decision of the Court on the law as the Court conceives it and the evidence properly submitted.’

9. A ‘fair trial’ means a trial conducted free from all prejudice and in which the Court tries the case impartially after considering the evidence which has been properly submitted.

10. Since freedom of speech is fundamental, the press : both print and media, has a right of fair comment on matters of public interest. Indeed, press reports provide a valuable check against malpra