Question Details

Passage

The Editors Guild of India has expressed concern over the “draconian provisions” of the Press and Registration of Periodicals (PRP) Bill, 2023, that can have an adverse impact on freedom of the press. The Guild added: “Editors Guild of India would like the proposed bill to ensure that publishing of news in India remains free of encumbrances and intrusive checks on publishers by the Registrar, and that the primary emphasis of the Registrar and the PRP remains ‘registration’ and not ‘regulation’, as the latter has the potential of restricting freedom of the press.”

“In the definitions section, the term ‘specified authority’ gives power to government agencies beyond the Press Registrar, to conduct the functions of the Registrar, which could even include police and other law enforcement agencies. Given the intrusive, expansive, and vague nature of powers that the bill in any case allows to the Press Registrar, the power to further delegate this power to other government agencies including law enforcement agencies is deeply distressing,” the Guild said.

The statement says sections 4(1) and 11(4) allow the Registrar to deny the right to bring out a periodical and cancel the certificate of registration of a periodical to persons convicted of “terrorist act or unlawful activity” or “for having done anything against the security of the State”.

“Interestingly, the PRB Act, 1867, had no such provisions. Given the liberal and arbitrary use of UAPA (which is the basis for defining ‘terrorist act’ and ‘unlawful activity’), as well as other criminal laws, including sedition, against journalists and media organisations to suppress freedom of speech, the Guild is deeply concerned by the introduction of these new provisions, and the way they can be misused to deny the right to bring out news publications to persons who are critical of governments,” it said.

Among the other worrisome provisions listed by the Guild is Section 6(b), which gives power to the Press Registrar (as well as any other “specified authority”) to enter the premises of a periodical to “inspect or take copies of the relevant records or documents or ask any questions necessary for obtaining any information required to be furnished”.


Freedom of press is not specifically guaranteed under the Constitution of India but is implied in Article 19(1)(a) i.e. Freedom of Speech and Expression. Therefore, freedom of press is part of fundamental rights.

Options

A

Freedom of press being a fundamental right, no law can be made for registration and denial of registration of newspapers.

B

Fundamental rights are not absolute rights and reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of fundamental rights and therefore, laws such as PRP Bill can be enacted.

C

Freedom of press being a fundamental right, journalists and press is exempt from the operation of general criminal law of the country.

D

None of the above.

Show Answer

Correct Answer :

Option B

Fundamental rights are not absolute rights and reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of fundamental rights and therefore, laws such as PRP Bill can be enacted.

Solution :

The correct answer is: Fundamental rights are not absolute rights and reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of fundamental rights and therefore, laws such as PRP Bill can be enacted.


Step-by-Step Explanation:


1. Understanding the Context:
The passage discusses concerns raised by the Editors Guild of India regarding certain provisions of the Press and Registration of Periodicals (PRP) Bill, 2023. At the end of the passage, a key constitutional principle is highlighted: "Freedom of press is not specifically guaranteed under the Constitution of India but is implied in Article 19(1)(a) i.e. Freedom of Speech and Expression. Therefore, freedom of press is part of fundamental rights."


2. Analyzing Constitutional Principles:
Under the Constitution of India, Fundamental Rights—including the Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a)—are not absolute. Article 19(2) allows the State to impose "reasonable restrictions" on these rights in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, public order, decency, morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence.


3. Evaluating the Options:
- Option 1: Suggesting that no law can be made for registration or denial of registration because freedom of press is a fundamental right is incorrect. Parliament has the authority to enact regulatory laws provided they impose reasonable restrictions.
- Option 2: Correctly states that fundamental rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, meaning laws like the PRP Bill can legally be enacted by the legislature, even though specific provisions may be debated or challenged on their reasonableness.
- Option 3: Claiming that journalists or the press are exempt from general criminal laws is legally incorrect. Fundamental rights do not grant immunity from the general criminal laws of the land.


Hence, the option accurately reflecting Indian Constitutional legal principles is the second statement.

Unlock Our Free Library

Access expert-curated educational resources and study materials—completely free.

Discover more resources

You may also like

Mock Tests

View All
  • CLAT
  • intermediate
  • 2 hours
  • current affairs, general knowledge, legal reasoning, logical reasoning, quant

  • CLAT
  • intermediate
  • 2 hours
  • current affairs, english, general knowledge, legal reasoning, logical reasoning, quant

Ask AI Tutor
5 left
Q1 View Question & Options
AI Tutor is solving this question...
Reading question context & options...