This writ petition is filed by the publisher of 'Thejass', a Malayalam news daily, aggrieved by the denial of Governmental advertisements in their newspaper.

2. Thejass was initially granted Governmental advertisements. The petitioner says that the State has withdrawn the advertisements to the Thejass without any justifiable reasons and that the decision of the Government was without affording an opportunity of being heard. It is projected by the petitioner that Thejass is having more than 2 lakhs readers. It is also argued that the Governmental advertisements cannot be selective and discriminative.

3. The State's version for denial was on the ground that all the main Directors of Thejass, except one Director, are former activists of the Students Islamic Movement of India, a banned organisation and are acting as the main leaders of the Popular Front of India (for short, "PFI"). It is the case of the State that the editorial policy of Thejass is based on the ideology of PFI. The State version also shows that PFI has a clandestine agenda of islamisation of society by promoting conversion, communalisation of issues with a view to the benefit of Islam, recruitment and maintenance of a branded committed indoctrinated muslim youth for undertaking actions including selective elimination of persons, who in their perception are enemies of Islam.

4. It is also the case of the State that PFI utilises Thejass daily to propagate its extremists ideology among its readers and various news items published in Thejass daily clearly expose communal agenda and therefore, the State is of the view that Thejass is acting as a catalyst for polarisation and is creating communal divisions in the Society at large.

5. Newspaper in India is registered under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (for short, "the PRB Act 1867"). This registration is a mandatory requirement under law. The Parliament enacted the Press Council Act 1978 to establish a Press Council for the purpose of preserving the freedom of the Press and to maintain and improve the standards of newspapers and news agencies in India.

6. It is necessary to decide in this matter on the extent of State control on freedom of Press. For that, this Court needs to advert to the freedom of Press, its nature of function, limitation on operational freedom of Press, test to classify freedom of press for control and action, and the scope of judicial review of the decisions related to security of the State.

7. Freedom of Press in general in democratic State and in our Constitution:

7.1. The democracy survives only when there is a serious inter play between public opinion and law making. Informed choice is central, in governance in democratic republic. In "Democracy" every citizen is born with an appetite for information that transforms him as a true citizen. Thus, like a child hungry for food, like diseased need medicine, like underfed needs nourishment, like insecure needs security, the citizen depend upon information for his own strength and need. If a citizen's surge for free flow of information is denied, it would be the death bell of democracy itself. Realisation of a well ordered constitutional State is possible only when freedom is nourished; and that freedom is the life blood of democracy. It is based on the formation of public reasoning, the democracy acts as a catalyst in public governance based on an elected representation.

7.2. The freedom of Press is not specifically referable to the Constitution. However, under Article 19(1) of the Constitution, such freedom is referred.

7.3. In Bennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India [1973 2 SCR 756] at page 777, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows:

"Although Article 19(1) (a) does not mention the freedom of press, it is settled view of this Court that freedom of speech and expression includes the freedom of the press and circulation".

7.4. In Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd and others v. Union of India and Others [(1985)