Media And Law

2020 Manthan Boro BBA LLB(H) 6th Semester Roll no.: 145 Mobile: 8473905566

[MEDIA AND LAW ASSIGNMET] Submitted to: Professor Sudarshana Roy

Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Unit 1 ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 Unit 2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Unit 3 ......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Unit 4 ......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Unit 5 ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 29 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 30

Introduction

Mass media or Broad communications frameworks of the world shift from one another as per the economy, commonwealth, religion and culture of various social orders. In social orders, which followed socialism and autocracy, similar to the previous USSR and China, there were confinements of what the media could state about the legislature. Nearly everything that was said against the State was blue-pencilled or censored because of a paranoid fear of upsets. Then again, in nations like USA, which have a Bourgeois Democracy, nearly everything is permitted. Moving our view to the Indian point of view and its arrangement of Parliamentary Democracy, the facts confirm that, the Press is free however dependent upon certain sensible limitations forced by the Constitution of India, 1950, as altered ("Constitution"). Before the effect of globalization was felt, the mass media was entirely constrained by the administration, which let the media venture just what the legislature needed people in general to see and in a manner by which it needed the general population to see it. Nonetheless, with the beginning of globalization and privatization, the circumstance has experienced a humongous change. Before the innovation of communication satellites, communication was for the most part as national media, both open and private, in India and abroad. Then arrived 'transnational media' with the advancement of communication advances like Satellite conveyance and ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network), the result: neighbourhood TV, worldwide movies and worldwide data frameworks. In such a period of media upsurge, it turns into a flat out need to force certain lawful checks and limits on transmission and correspondence. In the field of media law we attempt to talk about the different parts of media and the pertinent legitimate checks and limits administering them.

Unit 1

Q1. Explain the issues relating to the freedom of press. Ans. - Freedom of the press is the freedom of communication and articulation through vehicles including different electronic media and published materials. While such freedom for the most part infers the nonattendance of impedance from an overextending state, its safeguarding might be looked for through constitutional or other assurance. The Indian Press has a long history directly from the era of British rule in the nation. The British Government sanctioned various enactments to control the press, similar to the Indian Press Act, 1910, at that point in 1931-32 the Indian Press (Emergency) Act and so forth. During the Second World War (1939-45), the official practiced thorough powers under the Defence of India Act and authorized restriction on press. Simultaneously the distribution of all news identifying with the Congress exercises pronounced illegal. In the Post-Constitutional Era, there is an adjustment in the standpoint. The Constitution of India in Article 19(1) (a) sets out that "All citizens shall have the right, to freedom of speech & expression." Unlike, the U.S. Constitution, the Indian Constitution doesn't explicitly give opportunity of press. In any case, it is currently very much settled that the words "speech & expression" in Article 19(1) (an) incorporates freedom of press also. The freedom of press implies freedom from impedance from power which would have the impact of obstruction with the substance and flow of newspapers. The Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution is dependent upon specific limitations set down in Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Freedom of Press is additionally perceived by the American Constitution. At first, the freedom of press was not explicitly given in the American Constitution. The freedom of press was embedded simply after the First Amendment of the American Constitution. The Amendment precluded the U.S. Congress from making laws which encroaches the freedom of press. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was affected by the Virginian Declaration of Rights. The Parliament is sovereign in the United Kingdom. In contrast to, the U.S., India and different states the subjects of U.K. doesn't have any ensured rights. The freedom of press is likewise all around perceived in the U.K. The residents have full freedom to do anything up to the degree that it doesn't damage the standard of common law or statute law. (Leg20) Even the strongest supporter of absolute freedom of speech, Jeremy Bentham, said that there should be exceptions to publicity if it would “favor the projects of an enemy” (Bentham, 2011

[1843], 585). Strong restrictions on freedom of speech in some countries must be applied to maintain national security by military forces. For example, when a story involves national security by covering conflicts between two nations, many of countries worldwide such as Eritrea, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and China do not allow journalists to cover it. By means of restrictions on journalists’ movement and electronic recording and dissemination or monitoring of authorities, the countries prohibit journalists to cover their troubles (Committee to Protect Journalists, 2015a). India is one of these countries. The military forces are killing journalists’ right of free speech to prevent the publication of pieces of information which might clash with their interests. For instance, the presence of journalists in India is prohibited anywhere near the most heavily militarized frontiers in the world, the Line of Control (LOC) in Kashmir, a border between India and Pakistan without military supervision (Khalil, 2016). The supervision operated by military force is rather misleading: the outcome of such a control is more of an obstacle to freedom of speech than a genuine matter of security. Security guards usually warn journalists about security, claiming that there have been several surgical strikes on the spot. As a distraction, they thus proceed to lead journalists to other locations, where they can appear under a positive light and can boast military bravery. In other words, military forces in Kashmir are in breach of the Indian constitution by showing just what they want to be shown to journalists. Journalists in India have also been attacked physically several times by government officials, which is also a threat to freedom of expression. According to Witchel (2016), the case of freelance journalist Jagendra Singh is evidence of violence from the police. He died from burn wounds in June 2015 and it was alleged that police set him on fire at the behest of a local government minister. His work related to the reporting of politics and illegal mining activities in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Judging by the examples stated above, the government officials such as military power and police, who have an obligation of maintaining law and order in India, are thus thought to abuse their power. Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution states that “all citizens shall have the right (a) to freedom of speech and expression” but officials ignore it and try to manipulate coverage and disturb journalists carrying out a watchdog mission by monitoring and threatening them in the field. The examples above are evidence of not only the contradiction between the legal frameworks but also what happens in the real world. The organizations which should serve the law and the public are serving the interests of government power holders, killing freedom of expression and endangering journalists’ safety.

It is a blatant fact when one takes a look at the culture of impunity related to journalist attacks and murders which prevails in India. The Impunity Index ranked India the lowest (13th, 14th, 13th) for the three years in a row (2014-2016). The main suspects of attacking journalists are criminals, political groups, and government officials (Witchel, 2016). Despite Article 19(1), the government limits the right of journalists, especially from performing their watchdog mission in these cases, when the coverage is related to the security of the state and the interests of power holders. In this circumstance, it seems that journalists in India do not have any protection for conducting their watchdog mission not only because of national security issues but also being monitored in the field. They also suffer from political corruption and the numerous attacks led by government officials as we have seen in examples above. Media monopolized by economic bodies in India is another challenge to the media’s watchdog function. According to Jones (2010), one of the Medias’ key standards is the separation of news between the editorial and the advertising spheres. In other words, journalists should be free from media ownership. Media ownership matters because it is derived from the concept of free markets, which is in the capital’s interest, not the publics. Moreover, once the capital penetrates the field of media, it also has an impact on media pluralism and diversity, which could end up diminishing different voices of the society (Doyle, 2002). On the contrary, since mass media is one of the main public sources to get information, journalists have an obligation to serve their needs with wide spectrum of stories. Thus, in this part, we will address how media conglomerates in India disturb freedom of expression by influencing the journalists’ performance. India has several cross-media ownership companies dominating media market. It does not only affect different regions, but it also involves different types of media such as the press, radio, TV and the Internet (Thakurta, 2012). Although India has The Media Ownership Rules, which aim at protecting the cornerstone of democracy, a degree of the plurality of media sources and contents, more economic bodies - even non-media groups -, want to integrate a media company into their business because it is the growing industry (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 2008). The Compounded Annual Growth Rate of the Entertainment and Media industry in India is projected to be 17 per cent growth between 2011 and 2016, estimating 21 billion US Dollars revenue. It is the highest expected growth rate among the 15 countries including USA, Japan, China, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada, Brazil, South Korea, Australia, Spain, Russia, India, and Netherlands (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 2013). These economic bodies ambition to earn a profit also reach the news.

In 2014, a new media conglomerate, Reliance Industries Ltd (RELI.NS), appeared in India. It took control of the major news media group: Network18 & Investment Ltd (NEFI.NS) (Mahr and Chatterjee, 2014). Three senior editors from NEFI.NS stepped down as the merge, worrying about press freedom. One of them said “every day you can find some example of interference by Reliance – direct interference in news. They give oral instructions. They give hints (Mahr and Chatterjee, 2014)”. However, Reliance denied intervention in editorial decisions. The story of power holders trying to privatize airwaves companies goes back to the 1970s when advertisements were introduced onto the state broadcaster, followed by sponsored programs. The trend intensified in the 1990s when India opened up to transnational media corporations. The ownership of economic bodies made the media chase ratings, and rating- driven TV news in India are now forcing journalists to opt for the safety of the soft news option (Thussu, 2014). The tactic they adopted was that of the 3Cs in journalism: Cinema, Cricket, and Crime. The 3Cs strategy worked because India has one of the biggest celebrity culture based on Bollywood and the Indian people consider the cricket is the most important sports holding massive popularity cutting across all the classes, languages, and gender. Thussu (2007) calls this phenomenon ‘infotainment’ and worried that infotainment in the public is another problem caused by media concentration in India. He gave the case of widespread farmer suicides in rural India throughout a ten-year period between 1993 and 2003. Burcher (2006) highlights that a total of 100,000 farmers have committed suicide in ten years due to the extra cost of gene biotechnology, which arose to be too much to bear. However, the media dazzled by “business tycoons, charismatic and smooth talking CEOs and American or Americanized celebrities” (Thussu, 2007, 111), coverage of massive suicides has been sporadic and scant, at best (Burcher, 2006). The example demonstrates how bad the impact of centralized media companies is on democracy. They mainly ignore the serious coverages of news and give priority to soft and splendid stories. With such a strategy, even if journalists working in the field manage to dig out the story on power holders and monitor them through their watchdog mission, they are unable to deliver the news because they do not have a window to disseminate the news. In other words, communication means between them and their audience/readership are scarce and narrow. A well-built separation brings a well-balanced watchdog function in the field of the media. Without this condition, media ownership impacts the news and may eventually control journalism by manipulating the public’s sources of information. In line with this notion, the control which economic bodies have over journalism does matter, because it goes against the public needs and diminishes diversity and media pluralism. As Tocqueville (2000 [1835])

argues, media pluralism is important because more newspapers lead to less centralized states. While the right to freedom of expression is legally enshrined in the Indian constitution, a concentrated media ownership seems to be a challenge to editorial independence. Thus, it impacts the media’s watchdog mission, which involves monitoring various aspects of power including economic bodies and the media itself to contribute towards diversity within its society. The third and last danger to news coverage in India that we might want to contemplate is the courts' abuse of power. Through two solid models, we will show the constraints of the Indian administrative powers at both shielding news coverage from oppression and utilizing significant motivations to forestall journalistic inclusion. The first case we will endeavor to scrutinize is that of Indian journalists being excluded from a gang-rape trial in January 2013. As an article from online magazine Press Gazette stated, “The reason given was that the courtroom was too full and that there might be a risk to the safety of the accused men” (Turvill, 2013). If it is needless to explain that the size of a courtroom is nowhere stated in the Constitution as a reason to limit freedom of speech, the Court’s referral to the safety of the accused men in this case is equally dubious. The vagueness of the word ‘safety’ makes the Indian Court’s language rather evasive, which it has often been accused of (Godbole, 2003). Indeed, this said safety, although firmly asserted by the Court, doesn’t concur with the provisions of Article 19(2). The latter aims at preserving “the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, public order, decency and morality” (Hoveyda et al, 2010, 142).

However, it is hardly presumable that reporters jeopardized public order and morality: public backlash broke out before the trial took place, and journalists were denied the right to eyewitness the court case without having written anything about it. The Court thus went beyond its Constitutional authority of censoring freedom of speech, as it literally hindered journalists from performing their duty. In other words, the speech was not subjected to Article 19(2)’s restrictions: it was namely made impossible. Moreover, unlike what it claims, this partially justified suspension of freedom of speech may actually not lead to public order, on the contrary. Public accountability - keeping people informed about decisions made by the powerful -, is crucial to make people trust the good faith of Indian institutions (Boven and Schillemans, 2014). Failing to uphold this popular trust by silencing journalists can be detrimental to maintain Article 19(2)’s social order, as what people mostly wanted after this incident was justice … and truth. Therefore, journalism in India finds itself facing a new threat to fight and an updated

watchdog function: monitoring the miscarriages of justice - the Supreme Court in this case-, and hereby reinforce its effectiveness (Poyser, 2012).

A second case is also telling of the Courts’ shortcomings at giving shelter to journalists who are unlawfully tyrannized by other institutions. Indian journalist Somaru Nag was covering rural issues when he got arrested by policemen for allegedly being a Maoist sympathizer (Committee to Protect Journalists, 2015b). He was then kept in jail and beaten for almost a year before being granted a fair trial and eventually released. This case does not only show the police’s abuse of power and how dangerous it is not to comply with the 3Cs tactic mentioned earlier. More than anything else, it highlights the dramatic amount of time the Court takes to deal with controversies related to freedom of speech. This idea is widely emphasized by international NGO Transparency International, which stated that delays in the disposal of cases are one of the pillars of judicial corruption in India (Hussain, 2012, 4). This lack of reactivity when journalists come under physical and mental attack contributes to shattering the statue of journalism in India. Besides, it truly affects freedom of speech prescribed by the very same Supreme Court as we’ve seen in our legal framework, to which violence would be tantamount to negation of the rule of law and a surrender to blackmail and intimidation (Bhan, 2015). And yet, this situation demonstrates that the voice of journalism was utterly shut down at the expense of Article 19(1).

But the Supreme Court is not only slow, the way it deals with judicial cases is also described by many scholars as “complicated”, “backlogged” and “understaffed” (Yadav, 2014, 77). Such a detachment and absence of determination vis-à-vis the public interest appears quite paradoxical for a legislative body that claims to be the main purveyor of democracy in the country. Jain (2014) explains this apathy by pointing out how unfaithful the Indian Court is to the nation. Freedom of speech is not prioritized and efficiently protected by the Indian Supreme Court.

Unit 2

Q.2 Write a note on Press Council of India. Ans. - The Press Council of India was first settled in the year 1966 by the Parliament of India, suggested by the primary Press Commission. The article was to safeguard the opportunity of the press and for keeping up and improving the norms of the press in India. By and by, the capacity of the committee is represented under the Press Council Act, 1978. It is a legal, semi legal body which goes about as the guard dog of the press. It settles the grumblings against and by the press for infringement of morals and for infringement of the opportunity of the press separately. It is headed by the Chairman, who ought to be a resigned judge of the Supreme Court of India. The Council has 28 individuals from which 20 need to speak to the press by being designated by the press associations, organizations and different bodies. 5 individuals are designated by the 2 places of the parliament and 3 speaks to social and legitimate fields and one chosen one of the Bar Council of India. They serve for a term of 3 years. The Council was reconstituted on 22nd May 2001. It is being basically funded by revenue which is being collected as fee levied on the registered newspaper in the country on the basis of the regulation. No fees are levied on newspaper which has circulation less than 5000 copies. Functions of Press Council of India1. It helps the newspaper to maintain the independence. 2. It builds a code of conduct for the newspapers in accordance with the high professional standards 3. It works to promote technical and other research areas related to the news 4. It helps provide proper training to new journalists 5. It helps to spread the news all over India 6. It promotes the supply of newspaper from one place to another and on time 7. It helps to promote the proper function of production or publication of the newspaper in a proper manner 8. It helps to keep a review of on all the functioning, the production and processing of the newspaper. 9. It ensures that maintenance of the taste of the people should be kept in mind and see over both the rights and responsibility of the citizenship.

Powers of council1. They have the power to censure any rule which generally violates the journalists’ ethics and the public taste. 2. They can hold any enquiry against any editor of the journal if they found that any misconduct has been taken place with regard to any matter related to the press. 3. The proceedings should be taken place with regard to the judicial hearing under Section 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code.

Complaint ProcedureIf we have to make any complaint against the newspaper then the Press Council of India is the best place to start. If the complaint is not resolved by the journalist and the individuals are not satisfied then they can approach the Press Council for justice. •

The complaints should be in writing within two months of the publication of the news on a weekly or daily basis and four months in other cases. It should also be mentioned that how the publication is objectionable within the meaning of the Act.

•

The copy of the letter should be given to the editor and its reply should also be attached their within. A declaration form should also be attached. In declaration form, it should be clearly mentioned that this case is not pending in any other courts.

•

On the other side if the editor or the journalist feels that he is aggrieved by the action then he can also file a complaint under this Act. The journalist should inform the Council about the reason for the action of the authorities against him. Declaration against any matter is going on in any of the courts is also to be mentioned.

•

On seeing the complaint, if the Council feels that the matter discloses the sufficient ground then for the inquiry then they will issue a show cause notice to the respondent and then they will consider the matter through the committee on the basis of both the written and the oral evidence. If the council comes to know that the respondent newspaper has violated the norms of the journalism then the council while keeping in mind the misconduct which was committed by the newspaper will warn the journalist or will disapprove the journalist of not publishing anything as the case may be.

•

When the council takes up the case of the misconduct it also directs the government to take the appropriate steps with regard to the grievances of the complainant. The decision of the council will be final it cannot be challenged in any of the courts. The licence of the journalist can also get cancelled if any misconduct has taken place with regard to them.

Meeting SessionFor the gathering of the press, a notification ought to be given to each individual from the council at least 21 days before the gatherings being occurred. The beginning date of 21 days ought to be checked from the date of the proceedings. Press Council of India is essential to stop the unfortunate behaviour which happens among the press. By the passing of the Act, the circumstance of press has improved a ton. Columnists are terrified before distributing any phony news as this can influence their profession just as their permit can likewise get dropped. There are numerous rivalries which are being occurred among various papers.

Unit 3 Q.3 What do you mean by copyright? What are the main features of copyright? Explain the subject matters that are protected under the copyright? Ans. - Copyright is a type of licensed innovation insurance allowed under Indian law to the makers of unique works of origin, for example, abstract works (counting PC projects, tables and assemblages including PC databases which might be communicated in words, codes, plans or in some other structure, including a machine coherent medium), emotional, melodic and aesthetic works, cinematographic movies and sound chronicles. Copyright law ensures articulations of thoughts as opposed to the thoughts themselves. Under area 13 of the Copyright Act 1957, copyright insurance is given on dramatic works, literary works, musical works, artistic works, cinematograph movies and sound chronicle. For instance, books, PC programs are secured under the Act as literary works. Copyright refers to a bundle of exclusive rights vested in the owner of copyright by virtue of Section 14 of the Act. These rights can be exercised only by the owner of copyright or by any other person who is duly licensed in this regard by the owner of copyright. These rights include the right of adaptation, right of reproduction, right of publication, right to make translations, communication to public etc. Copyright protection is conferred on all Original literary, artistic, musical or dramatic, cinematograph and sound recording works. Original means, that the work has not been copied from any other source. Copyright protection commences the moment a work is created, and its registration is optional. However it is always advisable to obtain a registration for a better protection. Copyright registration does not confer any rights and is merely a prima facie proof of an entry in respect of the work in the Copyright Register maintained by the Registrar of Copyrights. As per Section 17 of the Act, the author or creator of the work is the first owner of copyright. An exception to this rule is that, the employer becomes the owner of copyright in circumstances where the employee creates a work in the course of and scope of employment.

13

Copyright registration is invaluable to a copyright holder who wishes to take a civil or criminal action against the infringer. Registration formalities are simple and the paperwork is least. In case, the work has been created by a person other than employee, it would be necessary to file with the application, a copy of the assignment deed. THE MAIN FEATURES OF COPYRIGHT LAW OF INDIA ARE AS FOLLOWS1. CREATION OF COPY RIGHT BOARD Copyright Office and a Copyright Board was created to make registration process of Copyright easy and to address the related to copyright and compulsory licensing of Copyright. 2. DEFINITION OF WORK It defines clearly various categories of work in which copyright can subsist and the scope of the rights. A work means any artistic, dramatic, musical, artistic work or cinematographic film or sound recording. 3. AUTHORSHIP & OWNERSHIP According to the Act the author/creator is the first owner of the work. In case of musical work the composer is the author or creator, in case of cinematograph film the producer is the author /owner whereas in case of Government work normally the concerned Government body is the author 4. TERM The general term of Copyright is 60 years. Term of copyright for musical, dramatic and artistic works, except for photograph is sixty years from the year in which the author died. 5. ASSIGNMENT & COMPULSORY LICENSING The copyright owner can transfer his/her rights to another person in return of some fixed royalty. The owner can transfer the all the rights or some of the rights to the Assignee (The person whom the rights will be transferred. The owner can license his rights to another person as well. It is known as Compulsory Licensing. It helps in curbing misuse of rights by the owner

14

6. FORMATION OF COPYRIGHT SOCIETIES Copyright Society is a registered administrative body that looks after the management and protection of copyrights. 7. BROADCAST REPRODUCTION RIGHTS The Act gives special rights, to a broadcast organization, known as “Broadcast Reproduction Rights”. It is given for 25 years. 8. PERFORMER’S RIGHTS It gives protection to the performers. The right is given for fifty years. 9. INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT According to this provision a foreigner is entitled to enjoy copyright for his work in India. 10. INFRINGEMENT DEFINED When a person without permission from the owner tries to use the rights related to the work, it is known as infringement. E.g. A person making copies of a Book without license. 11. EXCEPTION If a person uses the work for research, analysis or for educational purpose, he does not require any permission from the author. 12. REMEDIES AGAINST INFRINGEMENT Civil and criminal remedies are available against infringement.

Topic of protection of Copyright is same all throughout the Globe since copyright is happened to be of worldwide nature and because of progression of innovation any one can abuse the privileges of others from any part of the world. According to various sub-sections of section 2 of Copyright Act, 1957 and legal understandings every now and then numerous issues are qualified to get the protection.

15

The Copyright Act, 1957 provides copyright protection in India. It confers copyright protection in the following two forms: (A) Economic rights of the author, and (B) Moral Rights of the author. A. Economic Rights: The copyright subsists in original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works; cinematographs films and sound recordings. The authors of copyright in the aforesaid works enjoy economic rights u/s 14 of the Act. The rights are mainly, in respect of literary, dramatic and musical, other than computer program, to reproduce the work in any material form including the storing of it in any medium by electronic means, to issue copies of the work to the public, to perform the work in public or communicating it to the public, to make any cinematograph film or sound recording in respect of the work, and to make any translation or adaptation of the work. In the case of computer program, the author enjoys in addition to the aforesaid rights, the right to sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire any copy of the computer program regardless whether such copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions. In the case of an artistic work, the rights available to an author include the right to reproduce the work in any material form, including depiction in three dimensions of a two dimensional work or in two dimensions of a three dimensional work, to communicate or issues copies of the work to the public, to include the work in any cinematograph work, and to make any adaptation of the work. In the case of cinematograph film, the author enjoys the right to make a copy of the film including a photograph of any image forming part thereof, to sell or give on hire or offer for sale or hire, any copy of the film, and to communicate the film to the public. These rights are similarly available to the author of sound recording. In addition to the aforesaid rights, the author of a painting, sculpture, drawing or of a manuscript of a literary, dramatic or musical work, if he was the first owner of the copyright, shall be entitled to have a right to share in the resale price of such original copy provided that the resale price exceeds rupees ten thousand. B. Moral Rights: Section 57 of the Act defines the two basic 'moral rights of an author. These are: (i) Right of paternity, and (ii) Right of integrity. 16

The right of paternity refers to a right of an author to claim authorship of work and a right to prevent all others from claiming authorship of his work. Right of integrity empowers the author to prevent distortion, mutilation or other alterations of his work, or any other action in relation to said work, which would be prejudicial to his honour or reputation. The proviso to section 57(1) provides that the author shall not have any right to restrain or claim damages in respect of any adaptation of a computer program to which section 52 (1)(a) applies (i.e. reverse engineering of the same). It must be noted that failure to display a work or to display it to the satisfaction of the author shall not be deemed to be an infringement of the rights conferred by this section. The legal representatives of the author may exercise the rights conferred upon an author of a work by section 57(1), other than the right to claim authorship of the work.

17

Unit 4

Q.4 Write short notes on: a. Obscenity b. Blasphemy c. Sedition Ans. – a. Obscenity: - Obscenity is one of the fixings which deny content from being screened or shown. The idea of obscenity is relative. Obscenity has been examined and test for obscenity has been set somewhere near a few nations relying upon the ethical standards, fairness codes and social structure of that specific nation Obscenity in U.S.A- In U.S.A , the term obscene refers to material which the average person applying contemporary standards would find that, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, contains patently offensive depictions or descriptions of specified sexual conduct, & has no serious literary, artistic , political or scientific value. Miller vs. California is one of the important cases decided by the Supreme Court of U.S which lays down the community standard test to define obscenity offensive. After the age old Hicklin’s test laid down by the English courts, the Miller’s test is much modern & contemporary. In this case the appellant conducted a mass mailing campaign to advertise the sale of illustrated books, euphemistically called adult material. After a jury trial he was convicted for violating California Penal Code sec 311.2 (a) a misdemeanour, by knowingly distributing obscene matter, and the Appellate Department, Superior Court of California, County of Orange, summarily affirmed the judgment without opinion. Appellant’s conviction was specifically based on his conduct in causing five unsolicited advertising brochures to be sent through the mail in an envelope addressed to a restaurant in Newport Beach, California. The envelope was opened by the manager of the restaurant and his mother. They had not requested the brochures; they complained to the police. The brochures advertised four books entitled “Intercourse,” “ManWoman,” “Sex Orgies Illustrated,” and “An Illustrated History of Pornography,” and a film entitled “Marital Intercourse.” While the brochures contained some descriptive printed material, primarily they consisted of pictures and drawings very explicitly depicting men and 18

women in groups of two or more engaging in a variety of sexual activities, with genitals often prominently displayed. This case involves the application of a State’s criminal obscenity statute to a situation in which sexually explicit materials have been thrust by aggressive sales action upon unwilling recipients who had in no way indicated any desire to receive such materials. This case laid down three pointers in determining whether the content for display is obscene or not. The three tests are: (a) it appeals to the prurient interest, (b) it is patently offensive, and (c) it lacks any redeeming value. Roth vs. United States is one of the earliest cases which the Supreme Court of U.S decided on obscenity. In this case the court sustained a conviction under the federal statute punishing the mailing of obscene lewd, lascivious or filthy . . .” materials. The key to that holding was the Court’s rejection of the claim that obscene materials were protected by the First Amendment. Five Justices joined in the opinion stating:”All ideas having even the slightest redeeming social importance — unorthodox ideas, controversial ideas, even ideas hateful to the prevailing climate of opinion — have the full protection of the [First Amendment] guaranties, unless excludable because they encroach upon the limited area of more important interests.

Obscenity in U.K- The test to determine obscenity under English law has been coined quite sometimes back in R vs. Hicklin case. This is one of the earliest cases where the test for obscenity has been laid down. This case revolved around Henry Scott who resold copies of anti Christ pamphlets entitled “The Confessional Unmasked: sewing the depravity of the Romish priesthood, the iniquity of the Confessional, and the questions put to females in confession.” When the pamphlets were ordered to destroy as obscene, Scott appealed the order to the court of Quarter Sessions. Benjamin Hicklin, a London magistrate who was in charge of such orders as Recorder, revoked the order of destruction. Hicklin held that Scott’s purpose had not been to corrupt public morals but to expose problems within the Catholic Church; hence, Scott’s intention was innocent. The authorities appealed Hicklin’s reversal, bringing the case to the consideration of the Court of Queen’s Bench. In the Queen’s Bench it was held that the order of the justices were right as the publication of such an obscene pamphlet was a misdemeanour, and was not justified or excused by the appellant’s innocent motives or object; he must be taken to have intended the natural consequences of his act. The modern English law on obscenity began with Obscene Publications Act which came into force in 1959. This Act was brought into force to amend the law relating to publication of obscene matter, to provide for the protection of literature; & to strengthen the law concerning pornography. Sec 1of 19

the Act lays down the test for determining obscenity. Sec 1(1) of the Act states: “For the purposes of this Act an article shall be deemed to be obscene if its effect or (where the article comprises two or more distinct items) the effect of any one of its items is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it”. Obscenity in India- Sec 292(1) Of the Indian Penal Code defines obscenity as “For the purpose of sub section (2), a book , pamphlet, paper writing , drawing, painting, representation , figure or any other object , shall be deemed to be obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect , or (where it comprises) two or more distinct items) the effect of any of its items , is if taken as a whole , such as to tend to deprave & corrupt persons who are likely , having regard to all relevant circumstances , to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied. The Indian law on obscenity has been modelled from the English law itself. So the test for determining obscenity is the old & long outdated Hicklin’s test as is under English law which the Supreme Court has relied upon in deciding many cases. Though the Supreme Court of India has said that there can be no uniform test for obscenity & therefore each case would have to be judged on its own facts. Supreme Court of India relied on Hicklin’s test while deciding the case of Ranjit. D.Udeshi vs. State of Maharashtra after 6yrs Hicklin’s test has been outdated in England after the coming into force of Obscene Publications Act in England. This is one of the important cases that Supreme Court has decided in matter of obscenity. In the present case the appellant , one of the four partners of a firm owning a book stall named , “Happy Book Stall” in Bombay was convicted by the lower court magistrate for being in possession of a copy of a book named , ‘Lady Chaterley’s Lover” which was the unexpurgated version. This book was adjudged to be obscene. Not only the appellant, the other four partners were also convicted. The High Court upheld the judgment of the lower court magistrate. Then this case came for appeal to the Supreme Court. In the Supreme Court the appellant claimed that it must be proved by the prosecution that the appellant sold the copies to corrupt the mind of the purchaser’s i.e. the appellant sold the copies knowing they are obscene. The appellant also claimed that sec 292(1) of I.P.C was void as it violated the freedom of speech & expression under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution & even if the sec was valid it has to be proved by the prosecution that the book was obscene.

20

b. Blasphemy: - The word blasphemy implies "irreverence to God, religion, a religious icon, or anything else that is considered sacred." It has been considered a common-law felony [in the U.S.] due to its tendency to provoke peace breaches. Some of the laws specifically render crime illegal. Nevertheless, the reasoning for blasphemy being considered a felony is valid not only in common law countries but globally. In the constitution of India, the word “secular” was added in the preamble by the 42nd Amendment, which made it crystal clear that India is a secular country and the state will not indulge in the religious matter of the people as all religions are equal to the state. With the aforementioned concept of secularism, section 295 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 criminalizes insult to any religion. It allows up to three years imprisonment and fines for “whoever, with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class.” But the laws should not be read in their strict sense and should not be applied strictly going by the words. It should be interpreted keeping in mind the relevant facts of the respective cases. The aforementioned section does not stipulate everything to be penalized and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class of citizens, it only penalizes malicious acts which are deliberate in nature. Blasphemy laws in the United Kingdom were specific to blasphemy against Christianity. In 1985, the Law Commission (England and Wales) published a report, Criminal Law: Offences against Religious and Public Worship, which concluded that the common law offenses of blasphemy and blasphemous libel should be abolished without replacement. On 5 March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offenses of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales. A prosecution for blasphemy in the United States would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution and no blasphemy laws exist at the federal level. There are many instances where the misuse of blasphemy law can be seen, like on August 20, 2013, driving hostile to superstition campaigner Narendra Dabholkar was shot and murdered by two men on a motorbike. The murder came days after the state government swore to 21

represent an against superstition charge, went for making it an offense to abuse or dupe individuals with ‘otherworldly’ customs, charms and cures. This bill was nearly connected with Dabholkar’s work and was contradicted by numerous conservative and Hindu patriot bunches who marked it “hostile to Hindu”

c. Sedition: - Every citizen has been given freedom to speak and express their views under Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian Constitution. However, this freedom is not absolute and some reasonable restrictions have been imposed on freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2). But when a person does an act by his words, signs or representation which is held to be contemptuous towards the Government of India, then such act is punishable under section 124-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Sedition is an offence that criminalizes speech that is regarded to be disloyal to or threatening to the state. The provision of Section 124A is very wide and it covers the act of defamation of the Government excluding any criticism in good faith of any particular measures or acts of administration. The term ‘Sedition’ means “conduct or speech which results in mutiny against the authority of the state”. Law of Sedition deals with section 124A of IPC, 1860, is considered as a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech. It was drafted by Thomas Macaulay and introduced in 1870. The following points describe the origin of sedition law: •

Origin of Sedition law in India is connected to the Wahabis Movement of the 19th century.

•

This was an Islamic revivalist movement and was led by Syed Ahmed Barelvi.

•

Since 1830, the movement was active but in the wake of 1857 revolt, it turned into armed resistance, a Jihad against the British.

•

The British termed Wahabis as rebels and carried out military operations against Wahabis.

In British Era, Section 124A was not a part of Indian Penal Code, 1860. But this Section was inserted into IPC by the IPC (Amendment) Act, 1870. By an amending act of 1898, this provision was later replaced by Section 124A. According to the British Era Law, under the 22

old IPC, “Exciting or attempting to excite feelings or disaffection was considered as Sedition”. Meaning of Sedition under Section 124A of IPC, 1860 “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government shall be punishable with Life Imprisonment”. In India, what constitutes as ‘Sedition’ is highly debated. As per the Indian Penal Code, for an act to be called “seditious”, it should have the following components:

1. Any words, which can be either written or spoken, or signs which include placards/posters (visible representation) 2. Must bring hatred/contempt/disaffection against the Indian Government 3. Must result in ‘imminent violence’ or public disorder.

As per the interpretation of the Court on Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 the following acts have been considered as “seditious”

•

Raising of slogans against the government – example – “Khalistan Zindabad” by groups. Raising of slogans by individuals casually once or twice was held not to be seditious. [3]

•

A speech made by a person must incite violence / public disorder for it to be considered as seditious [4]. Subsequent cases have gone to further interpret it to include “incitement of imminent violence”.

•

Any written work which incites violence and public disorder.

The following are some laws which cover Sedition law: •

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 124A)

•

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 95)

•

The Seditious Meetings Act, 1911 &

•

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (Section 2(o) (iii))

23

Unit 5

Q.5 Explain the salient features of Print Media and Registration Act, 1867. Ans. - During the reign of the British Government in India composing of books and other informatory material took a solid shape and with the coming of print machines different books on practically all the subjects and periodicals contacting each part of life began showing up. Push on training gave a catalyst to this with the outcome that parcel of written word opened up. Those in the field of composing, distributing and printing gave an idea to sort out a framework for tracking the distributions. The then East India Company was encouraged to track the distributions. An endeavour was made by the specialists to make an assortment of the books and different distributions exuding from the different print machines all through India. Governing body of East India Company gave a guidance that duplicates of each significant and fascinating work distributed in India ought to be despatched to England to be saved in the library of India House. Such guidance had a moderate effect. Again the Royal Asiatic Society in London encouraged the then Secretary of State for India to rehash the guidance of the late Board of Directors of East India Company and furthermore wanted that lists of the considerable number of works distributed in India ought to be sent to England. An arrangement of deliberate enrolments of distributions was developed yet it fizzled. It was discovered important to set up an arrangement of obligatory deal to Government, of three duplicates of each work in India. To accomplish this reason a Bill was presented in the Legislature for the guideline of print machines and paper for the conservation of duplicates of books and periodicals containing news imprinted in the entire of India and for the enrolment of such books and periodicals containing news.

Salient features of Print Media and Registration Act 1867: It has for a long time been the undertaking of the specialists to make an assortment of the books and different distributions exuding from the different print machines at work all through the nation.

24

It was a guidance of the late Court of Directors of the East India Company, which duplicates of each significant and fascinating work distributed ought to be despatched to England to be kept in the library at the India House. What's more, once more, on the pressing order of the Royal Asiatic culture in London, the Secretary of State for India rehashed the guidelines of the late Court of Directors, and wanted additionally that lists of all works distributed in India ought to be sent to England. The above directions had exceptional reference to the region of Lower Bengal, and the neighbourhood specialists of this region were gotten under way, and on an arrangement recommended by Mr. Talboys Wheeler of the Home Office, and developed by Mr. Robinson, Bengali Translator to the Government of Bengal, an arrangement of enrolment of books on terms profitable to distributers was told, and an index of books distributed in the region of Lower Bengal was readied. Oct this inventory had fundamentally to be set up by its supervisor, not with the books before him, however from such flawed and dissipated notification and ads of such books as he could gather from papers and other such sources, and was seen along these lines as, all things considered, and basically, off base, and the enrolment framework totally separated, there having been nevertheless three application for enlistment over the span of exactly nine months. To send to England indexes basically and to a significant degree wrong, of or such books as can be directed out by private and spur of the moment enquiries, is obviously of no kind of utilization. However the index arranged in 1862, defective as it might have been, indicated a rundown of somebody thousand and 500 books of pretty much intrigue and significance, all distributed inside the last ten or fifteen years, and it is famous that, in the area of Lower Bengal at any rate, there has been recently years incredible action in the artistic world, and consistently shows no immaterial increment in the quantity of works, unique or re-printed, distributed, and in the quantity of print machines set up. The writing of a nation is no uncertainty a file of the sentiment and state of the individuals, and such a file it is fundamental to acceptable government that the leaders of a nation should gangs.

25

In the intrigue, as well, of history and of the researchers of Europe, it is without a doubt insightful to give that a total assortment of the distributions of the press of this nation ought to be made also in this nation as in England. It can't, as well, however be good for creators and distributers that indexes of their works, and to an extremely constrained degree duplicate of the works themselves, ought to be open to general society at certain notable spots. Frameworks of intentional enrolment of distributions have been found to fizzle, and it is along these lines proposed by this Bill to set up an arrangement of mandatory deal to Government of three duplicates of each book or comparable work imprinted in India. One duplicate of the work will be sent to England, and the two others, after the book has been enrolled, will be kept in this nation, to be saved in places the proposed new Museum for example where they will be painstakingly saved. A rundown of works enrolled will be distributed each quarter in the Official Newspaper. It isn't exactly evident that the arrangements of the proposed Bill are up 'til now required in any region other than that of Lower Bengal, yet in as, for example, the said arrangements are sensible and straightforward, and in as much as it is sure that with the spread of training there will emerge in different areas of the Empire, as there has emerged in Bengal, a relating action in writing, it is given that the Bill might be reached out by warning to any piece of the Empire. ACT 25 OF 1867:- The Bill was passed by the Legislature and it went ahead the resolution book as the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (25 of 1867). The classification of the Act has been given by the Indian Short Titles Act, 1897 (14 of 1897).

LIST OF AMENDING ACTS AND ADAPTATION ORDERS The Repealing Act, 1870 (14 of 1870). The Press and Registration of Books Act (1867) Amendment Act, 1890 (10 of 1890). 1. The Amending Act, 1891 (12 of 1891) 2. The Indian Short Titles Act, 1897 (14 of 1897). 26

3. The Indian Copyright Act, 1914 (3 of 1914). 4. The Repealing and Amending Act, 1914 (10 of 1914) 5. The Repealing and Amending Act, 1915 (11 of 1915) 6. The Devolution Act, 1920 (38 of 1920) 7. The Press Law Repeal and Amendment Act, 1922 (14 of 1922) 8. The Repealing and amending Act, 1923 (11 of 1923) The Government of India (Adaptation of Indian Laws) Order, 1937. The Indian Independence (Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances) Order, 1948. The Adaptation of Laws Order, 1950. The Repealing and Amending Act, 1950 (35 of 1950) The Part B States (Laws) Act, 1951 (3 of 1951) The Press (Objectionable Matter) Act, 1951 (56 of 1951) The Press and Registration of books (Amendment) Act, 1955 (55 of 1955) The Press and Registration of books (Amendment) Act, 1960 (26 of 1960) The Press and Registration of books (Amendment) Act, 1965 (16 of 1965) The Press and Registration of books (Amendment) Act, 1968 (30 of 1968). The Press Council Act, 1978 (37 of 1978). The Delegated Legislation Provisions (Amendment) Act, 1983 (20 of 1983). The Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 is the most seasoned of the current Press Laws in India. One needs to return his psyche to the second 50% of the nineteenth century to comprehend that the outside government needed to place a check on the Press in India. It felt that opportunity of the Press would bring about debilitating of the underlying foundations of 27

remote standard. Practically all national chiefs utilized their papers to stimulate a sentiment of patriotism in the individuals and to set them up for support in the battle for opportunity. A large number of them endured detainment. The pioneers had a similarly simple time yet lesser humans were sent to the Andaman to carry out their punishment. The Press and Registration of Books Act is a relic of that time. What the Press needs is an Act with regards to the hours of the 21st century. It has been amended in the long periods of Independence, yet the revisions have been made to meet some particular circumstances. No endeavour was made to survey the Act in totality and align it with the requirements and yearnings of the Press in a law based nation like India. There has been no interest from the Press for an exhaustive redesign of the Act conceivably on the grounds that it is just administrative in nature; the technique it sets down might be unwieldy. In any case, the punishments are light. There are numerous abnormalities in the first Act. These have expanded in light of corrections produced using time to time, however with well meaning goals, yet they have additionally confused issues.

28

Conclusion

In this time of media booming, one can't just stay restricted to the limits of the conventional media. The media world has extended its measurements by including inside its circle, the broadening vistas of digital media and so on. As a result, the laws administering them are additionally various. It isn't inside the extent of this Assignment to manage the entire subject of media laws, yet this Assignment makes an individual mindful of the different significant enactments influencing the different parts of Media Communication, making him mindful of his privileges and encouraging him to practice them inside the system of law existing in India and at long last facilitating the reason for "Freedom Of Speech And Expression” and “Dissemination of Knowledge". Taking everything into account, the press assumes a significant job in this day and age. The news given by various papers ought to be right as all the residents of India read the paper and this affects their life. Nothing ambiguous ought to be referenced in the paper. All the news in regards to each area ought to be referenced. Individuals reserve a privilege to realize that what's going on the planet.

29

Bibliography Baba, J. (2014). Press Commission and Press Council of India, wecommunication, [Online], Available at: http://wecommunication.blogspot.fr/2014/09/press-commission-and-press-council-of.html Bentham, J. (2011 [1843]), Jeremy Bentham, The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 2, Online library of liberty. [Online] Available at: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/bentham-the-works-of-jeremybentham-vol-2 Bhan, I. (2015), Legal Eagles: Stories of The Top Seven Indian Lawyers, New York: Random House. Bhatia, G. (2014), Free Speech and Source Protection for Journalists, The Centre for Internet and Society, [Online], Available at: http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/free-speech-andsource-protection-for-journalists Boven, M. and Schillemans, T. (2014) The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burcher, S. (2006), Stem Farmers’ Suicides with Organic Farming, Science in Society Archive, [Online] Available at: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/farmersuicides.php Committee to Protect Journalists (2015a), 10 Most Censored Countries, Attacks on the Press. [Online] Available at: https://www.cpj.org/2015/04/10-most-censored-countries.php Committee to Protect Journalists (2015b), Journalist covering sensitive rural issues in India jailed, Committee to Protect Journalists. [Online] Available at: https://cpj.org/2015/12/journalist-coveringsensitive-rural-issues-in-indi.php Doyle, G. (2002), Media ownership: the economics and politics of convergence and concentration in the UK and European media. London; Thousand Oaks Calif. Godbole, M. (2003) Public Accountability and Transparency: The Imperatives of Good Governance, New Delhi: Orient Longman.Heehs, P. (1988), India's freedom struggle, 1857-1947: A short history, Oxford: Oxford University Press Hoveyda, A., Kumar R. and Alam M. (2010), Indian Government and Politics, 1st edition, London: Pearson Education. Human Rights Watch (2016), Stifling Dissent, Human Rights Watch, [Online] Available from: https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/05/24/stifling-dissent/criminalization-peaceful-expression-india [Accessed: 13th December 2016] Hussain, Y. (2012) Corruption Free India: Fight To Finish, New Delhi: Epitome Books Jain, M-P. (2014) Indian Legal History 2006, Raleigh: Lulu Press. Jones, A. S. (2010), Losing the news: the uncertain future of the news that feeds democracy. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.

30

Khalil, S (2016), Kashmir conflict: Tension on the India Pakistan border, BBC, [Online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37531900 Mahr, K and Chatterjee, S (2014), Indian media fret as conglomerate buys up major news channel, Reuters, [Online] Available at: http://in.reuters.com/article/india-media-idINKBN0G301920140803 Ministry of Law and Justice (2009), The Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2009, No.10 of 2009, New Delhi: Government of India Ministry of Law and Justice. [Online] Available at: http://meity.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/downloads/itact2000/it_amendment_act2008.pdf Nair, K. (2004), Law of Contempt of Court in India, London: Atlantic Books. Narula, S. (1999), Broken People: Caste Violence against India's "untouchables", 1st edition, New York: Human Rights Watch. Poyser, S (2012), Watchdogs of the Wrongly Convicted: The Role of The Media in Revealing Miscarriages of Justice, University of Portsmouth. [Online] Available at: http://eprints.port.ac.uk/12138/1/JUNE_POST_VIVA2_Latest_Changes_to_FINAL_PHD_THESIS_FOR _SUBMISSION_FEB_2013_from_JUNE_2012.pdf

Reporters without Borders (2016a), 2016 World Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders, [Online] Available at: https://rsf.org/en/ranking Reporters without Borders (2016b), The World Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders, [Online] Available at: https://rsf.org/en/world-press-freedom-index Sharma, D. (2009), Foundations of IT, New Delhi: Excell Books. Soni, A. (2016), In India, online campaign seeks to free press from risk of criminal defamation, Committee to protect Journalists, [Online] Available at: https://cpj.org/blog/2016/10/in-india-online-campaign-seeks-to-free-press-from-.php Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (2008), Consultation Paper on Media Ownership, New Delhi: Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. [Online] Available at: http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReaddata/ConsultationPaper/Document/cpaper23sep08no13. pdf Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (2013), Consultation Paper on Issues relating to Media Ownership, New Delhi: Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. [Online] Available at: http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/ConsultationPaper/Document/CP_on_Cross_media _%2015-02-2013.pdf Thakurta, P. G. (2012), Media Ownership in India-An Overview, Hoot, [Online] Available at: http://www.thehoot.org/resources/media-ownership/media-ownership-in-india-anoverview-6048

31

Thussu, D. K. (2007), News as Entertainment: The Rise of Global Infortainment. London; Sage. Thussu, D. K. (2014), ‘Television News and an Indian Infotainment Sphere’ in Biswarup Sen and Abhijit Roy, eds., Channeling Cultures: Television Studies from India, ed. Oxford Scholarship Online, 130-148. Tocqueville, A. de, (2000 [1835]), Democracy in America. Volumes I and II. New York: New American Library. Turvill, W. (2013), Journalists excluded from Indian gang-rape, PressGazett, [Online] Available at: http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/journalists-excluded-indian-gang-rape-trial/ Varshney, B., Kumar, P., Sapre, V. and Varshney, S. (2014), 'Demographic profile of the Internet-using population of India', Management and Labour Studies, Vol.39 (4), 423-437. Weaver, F. (2016), Finland top-rated for press freedom, this is FINLAND, [Online] Available at: https://finland.fi/life-society/finland-top-rated-for-press-freedom/ Witchel, E. (2016), Getting Away With Murder, Committee to Protect Journalists. [Online] Available at: https://www.cpj.org/reports/2016/10/impunity-index-getting-away-with-murder-killedjustice.php Yadav, S. (2014), Culture of Corruption in India, 1st Edition, New Delhi: Orient Waterman. Zhong, R. (2015), “How Modi Dealt with Pointed Questions from the British Press”, The Wall Street Journal, [Online], Available at: http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/11/13/how-modi-dealtwith-pointed-questions-from-the-british-press/ Zittrain, J. (2010), 'The Internet and Press Freedom', Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, Vol.45, 563-576.

Basu, Dr Durga Das, Case Book on Indian Constitutional Law, 2nd ed. (2007), Kamal Law House, Kolkata. Pandey, J. N., Constitutional Law of India, 42nd ed. (2005), Central Law Agency, Allahabad. Gaur, K.D., Textbook on The Indian Penal Code, 4th ed. (2010), Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi. Rai, Kailash, the Constitutional Law of India, 7th ed. (2008), Central Law Publications, Allahabad Tiwari, Dr. Mahendra, Freedom of press in India: Constitutional Perspectives, (2006) http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v1ch3.htm accessed on 24th January 2010. Halsbury’s Law Monthly, Vol.3, Issue 02, February 2009 Media Law 3rd Edition S.R Myneni 32