1. Bennett Coleman and Co. vs Union of India AIR 1973 SC 106

The petitioners (Bennett Coleman and Co.) challenged the restrictions imposed on the import policy of the newsprint under Import Control Order 1955 and under the Newsprint Order 1962. The newsprint policy of 1972-73 then placed further restrictions under four features:

•established newspaper companies cannot start new newspapers if they already own two newspapers, one of which is a daily newspaper.

•The maximum limit on the number of pages in a newspaper was set to be 10 pages.

•Increase in the number of pages shall not be more than 20% for newspapers that are under 10 pages.

•interchanging newsprint was not allowed between different papers of same establishment or between different editions of the same newspaper.

Under these newsprint policies, even within the quota limit, the petitioners were not allowed to make adjustments and hence this was challenged under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India i.e., Freedom of Speech and Expression.

Held:

The Supreme Court in this case held that the petitioner’s case was maintainable and stated that even though the petitioner was a company, it cannot be taken as a bar to not award relief for violation of rights of shareholders and staff. The Court also said that as claimed by the respondents, Article 358 cannot be applied to laws passed before the proclamation of emergency and hence, the newsprint policy can be challenged in the court.

The Court noted that freedom of press is an essential element of Article 19(1)(a) and the absence of an express mention of such freedoms as a special category was irrelevant.[1]

The court observed that the fixing quotas can easily tackle the problem of shortage of newsprint and said that the direct interference with respect to page limit and other such regulations were irrational and no justified. Limiting the pages of a newspaper would mean forcing the establishment to reduce the content or reducing advertisement which would cause them a economic downfall which hence, would limit the freedom of speech and expression.

 The Court held that the Newsprint Policy of 1972-73 was unconstitutional. And the case went in favor of the petitioners.

2. Hamdard Dawakhana vs Union of India

This case was related to the advertisement of prohibited drugs and commodities. The product sold by the petitioners was said to have self-medicating values which was advertised to the general public as well. The petitioners in the case alleged that they were experiencing difficulty to advertise their product as many objections were raised against their advertisements.

The Supreme Court in this case held that an obnoxious advertisement cannot come within the scope of Article 19(1)(a). It held that an advertisement as an ‘commercial speech’ has two things to keep in mind:

•advertisement which is a commercial transaction is just spreading of information regarding the product.

•it is beneficial for the public if the information is available to them through the means of advertisement.

Examined from another angle, the court said that the public at large has a “right to receive” the “commercial speech”. Article 19(1)(a) not only guaranteed freedom of speech and expression but also protects the right of an individual to listen, read and receive the said speech.[2]

Advertisement of prohibited drugs would, therefore, not fall within the scope of Article 19(1)(a).

3. Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras

In this case, the petitioner used to a publish and circulate a newspaper names “cross roads” which used to review and criticize the schemes and activities of the government of Madras. The government of Madras banned the entry and circulation of this newspaper in the state by the restriction of public safety grounds.

The supreme court in this case said that the right of circulation of the newspaper lies solely with the establishment i.e., the company of the newspaper and the state of Madras cannot interfere with the same. The ground of Public safety under Article 19(2) is not a reasonable restriction and hence a ban on entry and circulation of the newspaper by the state of Madras cannot be imposed under Article 19(2).

4. Prabha Dutt vs Union of India

The petitioner, Smt Prabha Dutt Chief reported of Hindustan Times filed a petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution asking for a writ directing the respondent, the superintendent of Tihar Jail, to allow her to interview the two convicts named Billa and Ranga who are charged with death sentence for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitions filled by them to the President of India for communication of the sentence are reported to have been rejected by the President recently.

The Supreme Court in this case directed the Superintendent of the Tihar Jail to allow the representatives of a few newspapers to interview two death sentence convicts under Article 19(1)(a) as “the right under Article 19(1)(a) is not an absolute right, nor indeed does it confer any right on the press to have an unrestricted access to means of information”.[3]

5. Indian Express Newspaper vs Union of India

Prior to this notification newsprint had enjoyed exemption from customs duty. The petitioners challenged the import duty on newsprint under the Customs Tariff Act 1975 and the auxiliary duty under the Finance Act 1981, as modified by a notification under the Customs Act 1962 with effect from March 1, 1981. They contended that after this notification the costs and circulations had been affected highly and it also had a crippling effect on freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution and the freedom to practice any trade or occupation under Article 19(1)(g).

The Supreme Court of India in this case held that Article 19 of the Indian Constitution does not use the phrase “freedom of press”[4] in its language, but it is contained within Article 19(1) (a). There cannot be any interference with the freedom of press in the name of public interest. The purpose of the press is to enhance public interest by publishing facts and opinions, without which a democratic electorate cannot take responsible decisions. It is, therefore, the primary duty of courts to uphold the freedom of press and invalidate all laws or administrative actions which interfere with it contrary to the constitutional mandate[5]

6. A. Abbas vs Union of India

The issue of censorship of films under Article 19(2) was mentioned in this case in front of the Supreme Court of India. Films are divided into two categories i.e., “U” films which can be viewed by the general public of all ages and “A” that can only been shown to adults i.e., people of or above the age of 18 years can only view the film. This was done under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 to protect the viewers.

The petitioner’s film got an “A” certificate instead of “U” certificate and hence, the petitioner challenged the censorship in the court. He said that it was a clear violation of his fundamental right i.e., freedom of speech and expression.

It was held by the court that “it had been almost universally recognized that motion pictures must be treated differently from other forms of art and expression, because a motion picture’s instant appeal both to the sight and to hearing, and because a motion picture had become more true to life than even the theatre or any other form of artistic representation. Its effect, particularly on children and immature adolescents was great.”[6]

Hence the court upheld the censorship on the film and the case was dismissed.

7. People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India

The validity of Section 33B of the Representation of People Act, 1951 was challenged by the People’s Union of Civil Liberties. Section 33B provided that an electoral candidate is not bound to disclose any information apart from that required. In Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms[7], the Supreme Court of India recognized that the right to know about electoral candidates is well within the ambit of right to information available under the right to freedom of speech and expression described in Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it stated that information about the criminal background of candidates, assets and liabilities of candidates and their family members, and educational qualifications of candidates should be available to the voters as a part of the rights.

It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that Telephone tapping, therefore, violates Article 19(1) (a) unless it comes within the grounds of reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).[8]

8. Emmanuel vs State of Kerala

Three students were expelled from their school in 1985 for not singing the national anthem of India. Since they were from the religious background of Jehovah’s witnesses, they just stood silently during the national anthem of India in the School’s morning assembly. After they were expelled from school, their father filed a writ petition in the High Court of Kerala stating that the expulsion was a direct violation of their fundamental right which is Freedom of speech and expression and freedom of religion which is protected by the Indian Constitution under Article 19 and 25. The court dismissed the case and stated that “no words or thoughts in the national anthem was capable of offending religious convictions”[9]. Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, their father later filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court of India.

The Supreme Court held that the expulsion of school children merely for not singing the national anthem was a direct violation of their right to freedom of expression. It was stated that there were no provisions of law that made the three students or any individual obliged to sing the national anthem and the state of Kerala’s department of education lacked statutory force to require school children to participate.

9. Sakai Papers Pvt. Lmt. vs Union of India

The constitutional validity of the Newspaper Act, 1956 is being challenged by the petitioners of the case which are a private newspaper company, its shareholders, and the two readers. The newspaper act empowers the central government to regulate the cost of the newspapers with respect to the number of pages and the allocation of space for advertisements. The company also challenges the Daily Newspaper Order, 1960 under the Newspaper Act which was passed by the government to start such regulations. The act and order regulated the prices a publisher could charge for the newspaper and hence the petitions argued that both the Newspaper Act and the Newspaper Order violated the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.

The court in this matter held that the laws mentioned by the petitioners i.e., Increasing advertisement prices would either result in the increase in the cost of the newspapers or would result in reduced number of pages which would be dissemination of ideas which indeed is a fundamental aspect of right to freedom of speech and expression. The court held that the right to freedom of speech cannot be taken away from a company with the sole objective of restricting business and hence the Newspaper Act and Newspaper Order were said to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India.

10. R. Rajagopal vs State of Tamil Nadu

A prisoner named Auto Shankar, who was held for murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment and death sentence, wrote an autobiography when he was imprisoned. The book discussed his personal life and his relation with many senior police officials, lot of whom have said to be involved with him in many illegal acts. Before his death sentence, he handed over the book to his wife after informing the prison officials of the same and the wife gave the book to the petitioners i.e., the editor, the associate editor, the printer and the published of a Tamil Magazine, for its publication. The Inspector General, when he got to know about the book, wrote to the published stating that the contents of the book were false and untrue, and that the book was defamatory in nature and that strict legal action will be taken against them if they proceed with publishing the book. The Tamil Magazine editor filed a petition against the Inspector General of Prisons to prevent him from violating their and the prisoner’s right to freedom of speech and expression.

The Supreme Court in this case held that the magazine had the right to publish the autobiography written by the prisoner, without his consent or authorization. It held that the state cannot prevent the publication but may sue the plaintiff for defamation after the article is published, but they had no right to stop the petitioners from publishing the book. It held that every person has the right to publish his/her autobiography because of his/her fundamental rights under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution and hence, the case was in favor of the petitioners.

Refences:

• https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu
• https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/freedom-of-speech-and-expression/
• http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1847/Freedom-of-Press—Article-19(1)(a).html
• http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-572-constitution-of-india-freedom-of-speech-and-expression.html
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/freedom-of-speech-and-expression/
• https://www.legitquest.com

The post 10 Landmark Judgements relating to Freedom of Speech in India appeared first on Legal Desire Media and Insights.

The Labour Laws in India have been the same from the time of independence in 1947 and no new reforms have been made in the law in the span of more than 60 years. This becomes a grave situation as there is a huge time gap and many more new laws need to be implemented for the welfare of labourers as India is a country with labour surplus. The Code on wages was already passed by the parliament and the other three Labour code bills namely – the Occupation Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020; The Industrial Relations Code, 2020; and The Code on Social Security, 2020, were passed by the Parliament in September 2020, merging the 24 major central labour codes giving the much-needed boost to the labour reforms. The government of India claimed that these laws were implemented for reducing the issues faced by the labour force and to rase compliance between the government, employers and the workers. Utmost accountability and transparency were claimed by the government through these reforms.  

The working conditions of the labourers are mentioned under Chapter 5, Chapter 6, and Chapter 7 of the Code of Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions, 2020 (OSHWC). As per a survey by Lawrbit, this code is needed in the Indian Labour Reforms because:

• ·       There is a 46% deduction in registration and licenses related compliance resulting in a consolidated database centrally

• ·       Workplace deaths in India is 20 times higher than that of Britain

• ·       There is a 21% deduction in prior laws resulting it to be a dynamic legislation as compared to the existing sectoral approach

The code is proposed in such a way that it has the provisions of 13 major labour laws, for example: the factories act, the mines act, the contract labour act, and many more, into one single code. The code has laid special emphasis on the working conditions of the labourers and have focused on the health, safety and welfare of the labourers. The most important question of the improvement of working conditions of labourers is being answered through this code as it makes mandatory provisions for the employers to make sure that labourers are working in a safe environment and making sure that there is a high rate of risk reduction of accidents. Not only this, proper facilities need to be provided by the employers for the welfare of the labourers, for example: cleanliness. Hygiene, drinking water, canteen facilities, adequate lighting, proper ventilation services, locker room, self-cleaning places, creche, etc.

Few of the key changes in the working conditions of labourers after implementation of this code will be:

• ·       Women with children below the age of 6 years, usually bring their children to work to keep a check on them and also work at the same time, but this makes it difficult for them to focus and take care of the children at the same time. Hence, according to the new code, there would be an increase of 20 female workers for the purpose of creating creche facility for children below the age of 6 years which makes it a total of 50 female workers instead of 30 which was before the code was implemented.

• ·       Before the implementation of the code, the workers had to overwork and were also forced by their employers to work for more time than required which was a clear violation of their rights. Hence the regulations in the new reform has a significant effect on the workers. According to the new code, workers cannot be asked to work for the employers for more than 8 hours a day and 6 days a week and they are also entitled to take one day off for every 20 continuous days of work.

• ·       When there are a greater number of employees, a canteen facility where the workers can refresh and energize themselves for the work ahead should be set-up by employers to help and enhance the working conditions of the employees. And hence, according to the new code, a canteen facility needs to be established by the employer if he/she employs more than 100 workers.

• ·       Some female workers are capable enough to work night shifts with proper rules and regulations and proper safety provided to them. Before the code was implemented, female workers were not allowed to do the same by their employers, but now only with their consent, they can work after 7PM till 6AM (night shift) along with specific conditions.

• ·       If there are more than 250 workers, then there should be a establishment of welfare offices which was 500 workers before as per the Factories Act.

• ·       Construction workers need to work with utmost care and detail, or else their life can be in danger; hence, it is absolutely mandatory for the employer to make sure that workers with loss of vision, deafness, or dizziness cannot be employed in construction work by any employer as it becomes a matter of safety.

• ·       Before the code was implemented, woman who were capable and willing of doing hazardous or dangerous work which they felt they could do with ease to earn a little more than regular, were not allowed to do the same. But after the implementation of the new labour laws woman workers will be allowed to work any type of work irrespective of the hazardous process or dangerous operations.

• ·       Sometimes it so happens that the workers need to find a place to live as they have to work at the same place for a long period of time. It becomes difficult to find a accommodation near to the work place which makes it tough for the employees to reach work at time and their efficiency at work increases. Hence, according to the new code of labour laws, employers should also provide temporary living accommodations to the workers within or near the work site for making it easier for the workers to reach work on time.

These small yet significant changes would help make the working conditions of the workers better. But there are still many loop holes in these reforms for example, a woman can only put in maternity benefit if she was employed for a minimum of 80 days before delivery and cannot be employed within 6 weeks of delivery, miscarriage or medical termination of pregnancy, which are being opposed by the workers at this moment. Looking at the fact that these reforms are the very first reforms in the labour laws after India got independence in 1947, even if there is still a long way to go with the reforms, these make a difference and mark a significant change in the lives of the workers. The major question that still remains is that whether these labour codes make a significant balance between economic growth and labour welfare or not.

REFERENCES:

·       https://labour.gov.in/sites/default/files/OSH_Gazette.pdf

·       https://www.lawrbit.com/article/the-occupational-safety-health-and-working-conditions-code-2019/

·       https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/new-labour-codes-whose-benefit

The post Working Conditions Under The New Labour Code appeared first on Legal Desire Media and Insights.

India is a country with utmost talent in the field of sports. Hockey, Cricket, Badminton, Football and many more are cherished by the youngsters and many of them make a career in these fields. India supports this involvement of youth by conducting various national and international events where the talented sportsmen can show their strengths and win the matches against the other sportsmen. But there are many things that have to be considered while conducting the events. At times, there are some contestants that choose unfair means to win matches, not only this, there are many instances where strict and abundant laws have to be enacted to protect the sanctity of the events. Sports should be played with utmost truth and fairness and anyone who dismays the same shall be liable for his/her actions.

Unfortunately, India has very limited laws and the matters of unjust means are held or listened to in the supreme court or high courts of India. This causes an issue because the judges of the Supreme Court and High Court do not have the same level of expertise in the field of sports and hence, sometimes the decisions made can be unfair. Hence, emergence of Law and Regulation in the field of Sports is very important in India so as to develop and contribute to the sports jurisprudence. Countries like USA, France, China, and many more have laid strong emphasis on sports law which make their sportsmen excel even more in the field.

In the recent times, we have seen and read about many inappropriate sports news which have shook the nation. The IPL Match Fixing in which Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals were suspended from playing the IPL for 2 years straight. Other than this allegation of sexual assaults, Olympic Games Scandal, Betting, Drugs, etc. are many things that we come across the news every now and then. But does the Indian Government have proper laws and regulations to control the same?

The Indian government established the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to promote, develop and excel in the field of sports in both national and international competitions. A few of the regulatory bodies which govern sports law in India are National Sports Policy, Sports Law and Welfare Association of India, and Sports Authority of India. Each regulatory body has a specific aim they need to fulfill for the welfare of the sports community.

National Sports Policy:

The history of national sports policy can be taken back to August 1984, when the policy was laid in the Parliamentary house. The sole aim of the policy was to improve the very standards of sports in the country. The objective of the national sports policy was to develop the infrastructure, integrate sports with education, access of proper and high-quality equipment’s and training to sportsmen, development of national sports federation, etc.

Sport Law and Welfare Association of India:

A non-profit organization which professionally operates with the aim to appreciate, advance, and ethically practice sports law in India by teaming up with legal practitioners and sportsmen. This organization provides consultation with reference to issues relating to sports law, governing bodies of different sports, intellectual property matter in the sports domain, etc. The organization helps in the exchange of views and perspective between different individuals by providing a platform where lawyers represent the athletes, the team, the leagues, the institute, etc.

Sports Authority of India:

This authority was set up to conduct various sports events in India and to strengthen the sports field and indulge into various events like academic programs, physical education awareness, enhancement of skills of Indian Athletes, etc.

In India, sporting events and competitions have a huge influence and millions see such competitions directly in stadiums as audience or at their homes through national television. And hence, these events have huge significance in India.

But these laws, policies, and regulatory bodies are only concerned with the improvement of sports or improvement of sports facilities, or sharing of views and perspectives. None of them have strict laws for violation of rules and regulations in the sports events. There are many unjust ways through which a sportsman can violate the rules and regulations of the sport. Not only unjust means of play, but unfair contract with the owners, broadcasting issues, match fixing, etc. do exist in the sports field and has to be taken into serious consideration and sooner or later rules governing the same should be laid down.

Usage of Drugs which are banned:

The most common and serious issue relating to sports is the use of drugs in competitions. Many sportsmen use drugs to improve their performance which strengthens their core and lets them get an upper hand among the other contestants. These sportsmen when caught are just penalized for the same. But this is a grave concern and the governing bodies need to come up with serious laws to hold these sportsmen accountable for their action and keep corruption in sports in check. Discouraging these activities since the very beginning would help the other sportsmen not to take such path and develop their skills with their own strength which would be beneficial for the country and the individual as well.

Betting and Match Fixing:

Some Athletes or Teams fix there matches before the start of the match and voluntarily lose or win a match in exchange of something more valuable. This needs to stop as it is a direct violation of fair play. It does not matter if it is a small game of chess or a big international match of cricket, Match Fixing should be deemed as a crime and the such corruptible activities should be a major concern. Betting and Gambling are also taken under corruptible acts after a certain extent because this indirectly results in profit and remove the actual essence of sports.

Issues relating to broadcasting events:

The grant of broadcasting rights of a particular sporting event causes a great controversy as many television channels want to broadcast the event for a bigger viewership. This needs urgent measures of introspection which can reduce the ruckus so caused.

There are also some issues that can arise between a sportsmen and his/her owner. For instance, a footballer who wants to retire in peace after a long period of time is denied of the same and is forced to play a few more matches for his team by the owner of the team. This is a grave violation of the player’s right and should be taken seriously. Many a times, owners tend to manipulate the player by increasing the working hours, reducing remuneration, degrading the working condition of the player in terms of training, etc. and the players face trouble in serving the team with his/her best efforts and hence, there should be proper rules and regulations for this to not happen to any sportsmen.

Conclusion:

Sports being famous and also an important part of the Indian culture gains more and more attention with each day passing by and hence, needs proper laws and regulations for covering the grey areas as discussed above. The existing policies and regulatory bodies are not enough for the grave and serious difficulties and issues faced by the sportsmen in the game. The wrongdoers need to be held accountable and be punished for their actions for a fair opportunity to the other contestants. Every sport event should be fair and just and the Indian Government needs to formulate laws for the same. Being a country with mostly youths, proper implementation of sports law would attract more talent in the sports field which would make India a even more strong competitor in the International events which would be a huge moment of honor and respect.

References:

·       https://www.asser.nl/sportslaw/about-the-centre/community/national-sports-law-associations/sports-law-welfare-association-of-india-india/

·       https://delhi.gov.in

·       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_Authority_of_India

·       https://yas.nic.in/sites/default/files/File918.compressed.pdf

·       https://blog.ipleaders.in/need-reforms-indian-sports-law/#Problems_marring_the_Sports_in_India

·       https://blog.ipleaders.in/emerging-sports-law-india/

·       http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3287-shortcoming-of-sports-law-in-india.html

The post Laws and Regulations relating to Sports in India appeared first on Legal Desire Media and Insights.