4.3. JUDICIAL REVIEW AS A PART OF BASIC STURCTURE OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION In Keshavanda Bharathi v. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court of India propounded the doctrine of basic structure. consistent with which the legislature can amend the constitution, but it can't trade the primary structure of the Constitution. The Judges in the aforesaid case made no try to outline the fundamental structure of the Constitution in clean phrases. however, chief Justice S.M.
It was mainly used as a method to suppress the Freedom Movement. Several freedom fighters, including Tilak, and Gandhi have been jailed under this law. Nehru himself criticised the law, saying “that particular section is highly objectionable and obnoxious and it should have no place both for practical and historical reasons, if you like, in any body of laws that we might pass. The sooner we get rid of it the better.” The sedition law is a draconian law in that it does not require the speaker to incite violence against the state. It simply requires that they “excite disaffection,” a term which the statute specifies “includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity,” extremely vague terms.
According to the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The exclusionary rule is not a constitutional right. Rather, it is more often considered a court-created remedy to policing methods as well as a deterrent against unlawful search and seizure, which is covered in the fourth-amendment. The exclusionary rule does not allow the government to use evidence gained that violates the constitution of the United States. In addition, any evidence gained through this method will be considered according to the same rule, meaning that it will not be allowed.
These restrictions are related to content based restrictions. As a result hate speech is lawfully prohibited whereas in United States of America the prohibitations of some speeches related to racism have been found invalid. The restrictions which are related to racial and religious have been upheld in India. Such measures are taken so that communal harmony must be maintained. Nazi demonstrations are prohibited in India on the grounds of public order.
The Law and Free Speech Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. However, not all speech is protected equally, and some forms of speech may be illegal. In some situations, states enact law in an effort to minimize offensive forms of speech, and in doing so violate the First Amendment. While the intentions of such laws are not to infringe on the rights of citizens, oversights of the intricacies of law do occur. Such is the case with the established Breach of Peace – Incitement law, at least in part.
Now the challenge will be to ascertain how a nation can apply its own rules of law without diminishing the freedoms available to citizens of other countries. II. THE LAWS THAT RESTRICT FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION India presents a picture with much secrecy legislation still in place restricting the free flow of information. No doubt, the freedom of speech and expression, like any other fundamental rights, is not absolute and can be reasonably restricted but the only restriction which may be imposed under Article 19 (1) (a) are those which Article 19(2) permits and no other. However, a number of Indian laws have a wide range of content that is objectionable and invite punitive
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2013 to deal with the rape cases in India. Societal violence against women: The communities and societies in India in most of the places are bound up with patriarchal normative universe from which women could hardly get true justice. The religious communities, village communities or the artificial communities like professional bodies are hardly epitome of equality between men and women. Quite often the religious communities have made the life of the women worse by forcing them to adopt conservative practices that are harmful to women. Constitutional Provisions on Women's Rights: The constitution of India confers special rights upon women.
Recently, a controversial rapper landed in trouble with the law when he was investigated by the police for making You Tube video purportedly annoying certain religious sensitivity. In the past, the government has been hard on those who express their views seditiously and would not falter to use the available legal tools like the Sedition Act,1948 and the Penal Code to prosecute them in court. Politicians, community leaders, academician, activists including some religious scholars were all targeted and not spared. Any right thinking person may wonder, does freedom of expression entails 'absolute ' freedom? If yes, why are people still being hauled up for speaking up their minds or trying to express themselves?
The term ‘freedom of speech’ as used in this article means that no member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings, civil and criminal, in any court for the statements made in debates in the Parliament or any committee thereof. The freedom of speech conferred under this article cannot therefore be restricted under Article 19 (2). Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 105 protect what is said within the house and not what a member of Parliament may say outside. . Besides, the freedom of speech to which Article 105 (1) and (2) refer, would be available to a member of Parliament when he attends the session of Parliament, no occasion arises for the exercise of the right of freedom of speech, and no complaint can be made that the said right has been invalidly invaded.
6. M. P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa, 6th edn., 2012, p. 1078. 7 .Srinivas v. State of Madras, AIR 1931 Mad 70. Freedom of expression fundamentally serves four broad special purposes. They are: (i) It helps an individual to attain self-fulfilment and self-satisfaction; (ii) It assists in the revealing and discovery of truth; (iii) It enhances and strengthens the capacity of an individual to participate in decision making process; and (iv)It puts in place a mechanism by which it would make it