CASE COMMENTARY ON BRIJ BHUSHAN SHARMA VS THE STATE OF DELHI

Author – ADITI SINGH & RAHUL SINGH KANDASI, STUDENTS AT ASIAN LAW COLLEGE

Best Citation – ADITI SINGH & RAHUL SINGH KANDASI, CASE COMMENTARY ON BRIJ BHUSHAN SHARMA VS THE STATE OF DELHI, ILE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW, 2 (2) of 2023, Pg. 18-21, ISSN – 2583-7168.

ABSTRACT

Press freedom is a prerequisite for political freedom and a successful democracy. The Brij Bhushan Vs State of Delhi, in which the fundamental right of the person was infringed due to the ultra vires order of the authority. Media freedom is the freedom of communication and expression through the media, including various electronic and printed media, and this freedom primarily means freedom from interference from the overarching state. In this paper, the important aspect of freedom of speech and expression are discussed.

Our Constitution has no explicit right to press freedom. As it is implied that editors and managers of the press have the same freedom of speech and expression as provided for in Article 19(1)(a) of the Fundamental Rights of Indian Citizens, Constitutional law does not give specific rights to the press. In this case, the restriction on the freedom of speech and expression was also discussed and it aims to the superiority and legality of the constitution of India. In this case Commentary on the defense of public order to stop the activity of the individual in the name of threat is also taken into consideration whether it covers under article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India. Disturbance of public order is to be distinguished from conduct directed against or directed against persons who do not disturb society to the extent or extent which causes disturbance of public order in general. It is the scale of the disturbance and its impact on community life at the location that determines whether the disturbance is merely a violation of law and public order.

KEYWORDS: Freedom, Speech, Peace, Media, Constitution, Public Order.