India currently ranks 151 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index 2025. This index assesses press freedom globally based on various parameters, including legal interference, censorship, media independence, and the safety of journalists.

Freedom of the Press in Context

Freedom of the press refers to the right of media organizations and journalists to operate independently and report news and opinions without unwarranted interference from the government or other influential entities.

The media plays a vital role in shaping public discourse, promoting transparency, and holding institutions accountable in a democratic framework. In India, the press draws its rights from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. Although the Constitution of India does not explicitly mention “freedom of the press”, these rights have been affirmed through judicial interpretation over the years. Key rights enjoyed by the media include:

1. Right to Publish and Circulate Information

The right to publish and disseminate information is a fundamental aspect of the freedom of speech and expression. While every citizen holds the right to express opinions, the press uniquely facilitates the large-scale dissemination of information. The Supreme Court of India has consistently upheld that the right to circulation is as vital as the right to publication.

2. Right to Conduct Interviews

Journalists have the right to engage with individuals, including subject matter experts, public officials, and members of civil society, to gather information and report diverse perspectives. This right is, however, subject to reasonable limitations pertaining to confidentiality, privacy, and national security.

3. Right to Criticize

An essential feature of a free press is the ability to question and critique government actions, policies, and representatives. The right to criticize is central to democratic accountability. Nonetheless, this right must be exercised with responsibility and within legal boundaries, it must not incite violence, hatred, or public disorder, nor amount to defamation or sedition.

4. Right to Report Court Proceedings

Media coverage of judicial proceedings plays a crucial role in promoting transparency and public understanding of the legal system. However, reporting must adhere to legal constraints under Article 19(2) and respect the principles of contempt of court, privacy rights, and confidentiality in sensitive matters.

5. Right to Advertisements

Advertising constitutes a major revenue stream for media outlets. The inclusion and publication of advertisements across print, broadcast, and digital platforms fall under the broader ambit of freedom of expression. However, this right is subject to adherence to advertising codes, ethical standards, and the prohibition of misleading, unlawful, or harmful content.

The right to freedom of the press is not absolute. Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India permits the imposition of reasonable restrictions in specific contexts, including national security, public order, sovereignty and integrity of the State, and protection against defamation or incitement.

In Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India (1972), the Supreme Court affirmed the autonomy of newspapers to determine their circulation and editorial scope. Similarly, in Sakal Papers v. Union of India (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that legislation cannot be used to curtail the press’s freedom under Article 19(1)(a).

A recent instance illustrating the regulation of press freedom occurred during the heightened tensions between India and Pakistan in April 2025. On 26 April 2025, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued an advisory instructing media outlets to refrain from broadcasting live coverage of military operations or troop movements.

This directive extended beyond television broadcasters to include digital media platforms, news agencies, and social media users. It underscored the need for responsible journalism in sensitive contexts, emphasizing that premature or unauthorized reporting could jeopardize operational security and endanger lives.

The advisory explicitly prohibited real-time reporting, unauthorized visuals, and “sources-based” disclosures related to defense operations. It warned that such disclosures could compromise missions and assist adversarial elements.

The Ministry cited Rule 6(1)(p) of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021, which states:

“No programme should be carried in the cable service which contains live coverage of any anti-terrorist operation by security forces, wherein media coverage shall be restricted to periodic briefing by an officer designated by the appropriate Government, till such operation concludes.”

Non-compliance with these guidelines could attract legal consequences, reinforcing the State’s obligation to safeguard military operations and personnel during critical times.

In a democratic society like India, a free and independent press is both a constitutional right and a foundational pillar of informed governance. While the media enjoys considerable freedom under Article 19(1)(a), these rights are subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), especially in times of war, internal disturbance, or national emergencies.

Advisories, statutory provisions such as Rule 6(1)(p), and limitations on real-time reporting are all examples of how media operations may be regulated in the interest of national security. However, such restrictions must be lawful, proportionate, and narrowly tailored to avoid undue censorship or infringement of journalistic freedom.

The press, in turn, must exercise its freedoms with ethical responsibility, avoiding misinformation, sensationalism, or content that may compromise public safety or national interest.

Ultimately, maintaining a careful balance between media freedom and national security is crucial to the functioning of a healthy democracy. This balance rests on mutual respect between the State and the press, grounded in constitutional principles, judicial safeguards, and an unwavering commitment to truth and public interest.

About the authors: Neeraj Vyas is a Partner and Mehak Chadha is an Associate at Saga Legal.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s). The opinions presented do not necessarily reflect the views of Bar & Bench.

If you would like your Deals, Columns, Press Releases to be published on Bar & Bench, please fill in the form available here.