AK

AKASH KUMARAIR 101· 2025

Question Q.7GS2GS2

Right to freedom of speech and expression in India is both broad in interpretation and conditional in application. Discuss. (15 marks, 250 words)

Open scan (p.13)
AnswerStrengthsGapsKeywords

Introduction

Art-19(1)(a) provided Indian citizens with Right to freedom of speech and expression. It contains 'inferred rights' which have been upheld by judiciary in various cases. Art-105 of Indian constitution provides parliamentarians with certain privileges. 52nd CAA, 1985 added 10th Schedule to Indian Constitution which is also called "shift Defection law". It was added to counter Aaya Ram Gaya Ram tendencies of legislators.

62 words

Main Body

Art-19(1)(a) provided Indian citizens with Right to freedom of speech and expression. It contains 'inferred rights' which have been upheld by judiciary in various cases.

It is broad in interpretation as =>

1"Right to Information" flows from Art-19 and has been upheld by judiciary. It led to passing of RTI Act, 2005 by the Parliament.
2"Right to remain silent" -> is also a part of four speech thus acting as protection against self-incrimination
3Shreya Singhal case -> Court struck down section - 67 A of IT Act as unconstitutional.
4Shrimn Court has also held "Right to freedom of Internet" in various cases holding there it as implicit right under Art-19.
5IT (Intermediary Public and digital media ethics) Rules also protect free speech by allowing only home sedition to pass orders for internet shutdown.

* Conditions and Restrictions on Right to freedom of speech and expression =>

2IT Rules => contain provision of internet shutdown.
3Dafli of survey for legislators => to prevent the guards to come out in public for national security.
4All India Series Conduct Rules => places restriction on certain rights of bureaucrats for effective governance

* Thus Art-19 contains broad spectrum of right to ensure free speech for citizens with reasonable restriction to maintain peace and harmony in society

Art-105 of Indian constitution provides parliamentarians with certain privileges.

Individual Collective

Currently they are not codified and are granted on the basis of convention.

* Need for codification of parliamentary privileges =>

Arguments for =>

1Rule - based privilege => ensures protection of parliamentarians .
2Reduction in disputes => whether a particular act falls under privilege or not .

* However they are made non-justiciable because [remains incomplete on page]

Art-39Afree legal aid
Art-41Right to work etc.

(B) Contains aspirations of the constitution makers => e.g. Art-39(b) & (c) => prevent concentration of wealth

Art-40 => village panchayats => 73rd & 74th CAA implemented it.

However they were made non-justiciable because [continues from previous]

1Distant nature of country => e.g. Implementing Art-44 Uniform Civil Code may hamper minority rights.
2Lack of resources => at the time of independence country lacked sufficient recovery.
3Burden on judiciary => Then principles are ideals; making them justiciable would have burdened Indian courts.
Parliament whilst making laws still take into consideration the DPSPs as fundamental

52nd CAA, 1985 added 10th Schedule to Indian Constitution which is also called "shift Defection law". It was added to counter Aaya Ram Gaya Ram tendencies of legislators.

However it suffers from structural weaknesses =>

5Disruption in work of MPs => by Privilege being protected them as being called for witness when they can deny it. Parliament is in session. Codification may either take away some privilege or grant some which can hinder the efficiency of working of MPs.

In countries like UK, parliamentary privileges are also under convention, Indian model has till now worked well but changing times can call for codification of privilege.

506 words25 paragraphs5 bullet points

Conclusion

Thus Art-19 contains broad spectrum of right to ensure free speech for citizens with reasonable restriction to maintain peace and harmony in society. In countries like UK, parliamentary privileges are also under convention, Indian model has till now worked well but changing times can call for codification of privilege.

49 words

  • Direct reference to constitutional article with subsection
  • Acknowledgment of 'inferred rights' showing jurisprudential understanding
  • Strong use of case law (Shreya Singhal case) with specific section details
  • Clear enumeration of inferred rights with proper examples
  • Good understanding of RTI Act connection
  • Mentions IT Rules showing updated knowledge
  • Connection between various rights shown logically
  • Good concluding statement synthesizing breadth and conditions
  • Mentions specific rules and regulations
  • Connects restrictions to broader governance needs
  • Direct reference to constitutional article
  • Clear distinction between individual and collective privileges
  • Recognition of convention as current basis
  • Clear enumeration of arguments for codification
  • Good understanding of reduction in disputes as benefit
  • Clear enumeration of constitutional articles with specific examples
  • Good understanding of reasons for non-justiciability of DPSPs
  • Contextual explanation tied to practical constraints
  • Clear introduction with specific amendment year
  • Identification of the actual problem the law was meant to address

Open original scan

Page 13

Topper

AKASH KUMAR

AIR 1012025

Subject & Paper

GS2GS2

Topic

Fundamental Rights

Freedom of Speech and Expression

Breadth and Conditionality of the Right

Writing Stats

617

Total words

25

Paragraphs

5

Bullets

Academic, structured with bullet points

Tone