54. Ultimately, the Apex Court, in the abovesaid decision has not expressed about the right of a citizen to publish private broadcasting station or television centre and it was reserved to an appropriate case.

55. In the decision in Rangarajan v. Jagajivanram , 1989 (2) SCC 574, the Hon’ble judges of the Apex Court has dealt with the scope of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, and it was held that it means the right to express one’s opinion by words of mouth, writing, printing, picture or any other manner. It would thus include the freedom of communication and the right to propagate or public opinion, the communication. But this right is subject to reasonable expression in the larger interest of the community and the count ry as set out under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.

56. Though these restrictions are intended to strike appropriate balance between liberty guaranteed and the social interest specified in Article l9(2) of the Constitution, relying on U.S. decisions in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission , 1914 (238) U.S. 230 etc., the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that Court cannot balance the two interests as if they are of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document