RESEARCH METHODS AND LEGAL WRITING

MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS: ASSESSMENT IN THE LIGHT OF

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Submitted by:

Ayesha Anand

PRN - 20010241017

LL.M. Batch – 2020-2021

In

October, 2020

Under the guidance of:

Prof. Dr. Furqan Ahmad

Symbiosis Law School, Noida.

Symbiosis International (Deemed) University, Pune.

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. HISTORICAL
BACKDROP.......................................................03
2. CHAPTER I-
INTRODUCTION..................................................05
3. CHAPTER II – HUMAN RIGHTS, FREEDOM OF PRESS AND THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA......................................................07
4. CHAPTER III – ROLE OF
MEDIA..............................................12
5.1. MEDIA AS THE PROMOTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA..................12
5.2. MEDIA AS THE PROMOTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.............12
5.3. RETHINKING THE ROLE OF MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS...................13

5. CHAPTER IV – RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND

MEDIA........................14
8.1. STING OPERATION VIS-À-VIS RIGHT TO PRIVACY...........................14
8.2. INDIAN PERSPECTIVE..................................................................15
8.3. NEW FACETS OF PRIVACY............................................................16
8.4. RIGHT TO INFORMATION.............................................................17
8.5. OTHER ASPECTS OF MEDIA INFRINGEMENT ON PRIVACY..................17

6. CHAPTER V - TRIAL BY MEDIA: THE REAL SCENARIO AND THE

INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM.....................................................19
7. CHAPTER VI –
CONCLUSION..................................................23
8. CHAPTER VII -
BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................25

Media and Human Rights 2

 HISTORICAL BACKDROP

It has been rightly said by Alexander Solzhenitsyn “Justice is conscience, not a

personal conscience but the conscience of the whole of the Humanity. The name of
the justice should not be allowed to be invoked only for the prolongation of the
pursuit of vindictive retaliation. The world is really in the need of generous
magnanimity and understanding charity. 1 Our world is becoming smaller and ever
more interdependent with the rapid growth in population and increasing contact
between people and governments. In this light, it is important to reassess the
rights and responsibilities of individuals, peoples and nations in relation to each
other and to the planet as a whole. Men are born and remain free and equal in
Rights. Social distinctions may be based only on common utility. 2 The truth has to
be holding self-evident, that all men are created equal, that their creator endows
them with certain in alienable Rights that among these are life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness.
Common rights or liberties are commonly characterized as the Rights, which each
Human being is qualified for appreciate and to have ensured. It means the right
relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the
constitution or embodied in the international covenants and enforced by the courts
in India.3 Human Rights are internationally agreed values, standard or rules,
regulating the conduct of states towards their own citizens and non-citizens. Human
Rights are “the common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations”. 4
It is immaterial that you call these Rights as inherent Rights, Fundamental Rights or
by any other name.5 The international community should support the strengthening
and promoting of democracy, development and respect of Human Rights and
Fundamental Rights in the entire world. 6 While development facilitates the
enjoyment of all Human Rights, the lack of development may not be invoked to
justify the abridgement of internationally recognized Human Rights. 7
Justice Patanjali Shastri in one of the earliest cases on the press freedom, namely,
Romesh Thapper v. State of Madras8 underlined the special role of the press in a
democratic organisation.
It was the United Nations Charter of 1945, which initiated the recognition of the
notion of Human Rights universally, and it affirmed faith in “Fundamental Human
Rights” and “in the dignity and worth of the Human person”. Article 14 to 17 deals
respectively with protection of the Right to life, protection from arbitrary arrest and
1
Dr. Justice Radhabinod Pal, Judge, High Court of Calcutta (Retd.)
2
Declaration of the Rights of Men and citizen, adopted by the National Assembly of France in 1789
3
Section 2(d), Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
4
Preamble, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
5
Syed M.H. Human Rights: The New Era, 2003 pg. 53
6
Article 8, The Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action
7
Article 10, The Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action
8
AIR 1950 SC124

Media and Human Rights 3

detention, protection from freedom of movement and protection from inhumane
treatment.9 Article 24 of the charter of the United Nations confers on the Security
Council “primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and
security.”

9
Constitution of Jamaica, Chapter III entitled “Fundamental Rights and Freedoms”

Media and Human Rights 4

CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION

Human rights are inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality,
ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. These rights include the right to
life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and
expression, the right to work and education, right to protection and many more.
The foundation of modern day human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR). The UN General Assembly adopted 30 articles of this Declaration in
1948. Since India was signatory to it, the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Part
III of the Indian Constitution are in conformity with these articles. When its spoken
of media, its an obvious statement that media plays an enormously important role
in the protection of human rights, most significantly by exposing human rights
violations and offering the required space for different voices to be expressed and
heard in public discourse. Media has been entrusted with the responsibility of
guarding the rights of the people in a democratic political system. The concept of
Human Rights is as old as Human civilizations; the origin of the contemporary
conception of Human Rights can be traced to the period of the Renaissance and
later of the enlightment of which Humanism may be said to be the heart and soul.
The promotion and protection of human rights has been a major preoccupation for
the United Nations since 1945, when the Organization's founding nations resolved
that the horrors of The Second World War should never be allowed to recur. The
history of mankind is marked by the efforts to ensure respect for the dignity of
Human beings. The struggle for the recognition of Human Rights and the struggle
against political, social, economic, social and cultural oppression, against injustice
and inequalities, have been an integral part of the Human societies. 10

The issues of rights violation has became so much centered upon the issues of
killing in the ongoing armed conflicts in the state today’s that other significant
aspects of a person are hardly seen as significant. In another extension armed
excessor violence related instances, state security forces have long been seen as
human rights violation while non state armed security groups have been clubbed
into the group in the background of their attacks on civilian locations and firing at
public places. The media is one section that keeps its eye and act as bearer of news
of what is happening on a daily grind. The reason for this are manifold, media
houses do not have any guidelines for what should and what should not get into
print. Even with electronic medium, the local cable news gets away with a lot more
insensitive portrayal of event and persons affected by those event, there is lack of
attention to details. There have been many instances where lack of understanding
of complex issues. The Telegraph newspaper recently showed composite picture of
five of its top administrators including the chief minister and the director general of

10
Yasin, Adil-ul and Archana Upadhyay, Human Rights, (New Delhi, 2004), p. VIII

Media and Human Rights 5

police) dressed in sarees. The media in Manipur has not met any form of protest on
the occasions that it has dressed up political leader as women and are totally lost to
the way it adds to the stereotyping of women as weak and inefficient.

As such it could be said that with the prevailing conditions; there is need for proper
check on the functioning of media as well. Today we happen to see that there are
many occasions wherein media either plays a biased role or disseminate
information which manipulated for sensitizing so that they could improve their
viewership and readership; and then there are instances wherein the media has
been treated harshly. Therefore, the need of the hour is to have an authority which
could closely and regularly keep an eye on modus operandi of media and put a tab
on them whenever they seem to be engaging in acts which tarnishes the media’s
image. With these initiatives, the violation of human rights through, by or in media
organizations could be prevented. Media freedom has been deteriorating around the
world over the past decade. In some of the most influential democracies in the
world, populist leaders have overseen concerted attempts to throttle the
independence of the media sector. While the threats to global media freedom are
real and concerning in their own right, their impact on the state of democracy is
what makes them truly dangerous. Experience has shown, however, that press
freedom can rebound from even lengthy stints of repression when given the
opportunity. The basic desire for democratic liberties, including access to honest
and fact-based journalism, can never be extinguished. In this paper the issues that
are related to the media, human rights, freedom rights that have been provided to
the citizens of India shall be discussed in detail so as to whether or not these said
rights are being violated, if yes then how and to what extent and so on along with
cases in order to understand the role or rather the decisions of the judiciary in
cases that involve media or press.

Media and Human Rights 6

CHAPTER II – HUMAN RIGHTS, FREEDOM OF PRESS AND
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

Speech is God's gift to mankind. Through speech a human being conveys his
thoughts, sentiments and feeling to others. Freedom of speech and expression is
thus a natural right, which a human being acquires on birth. 11 It is, therefore, a
basic right. "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek and receive and
impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers"
proclaims the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). The people of India
declared in the Preamble of the Constitution, which they gave unto themselves their
resolve to secure to all the citizens liberty of thought and expression. This resolve is
reflected in Article 19(1) (a) which is one of the Articles found in Part III of the
Constitution, which enumerates the Fundamental Rights.

Although there is lot of Freedom given to the Press, holds different meaning for
different humans.12 The right to freedom of speech and expression is subject to
limitations imposed under Article 19(2).

The right to speak freely is the idea of having the option to talk unreservedly
without control. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right
shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,
regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or
through any other media of his choice. 13The right to freedom of speech is
guaranteed under international law through numerous human-rights instruments,
notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article
10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although implementation remains
lacking in many countries.

No privilege and so far as that is concerned right to freedom of expression is total

and liberated in all condition however limited by obligation to keep up harmony and
congruity of the body country by practicing reasonability and limitation in the
activity of right to the right to speak freely.14 If exercise of this right is likely to
inflame passion which in turn may lead to further violation of human rights and
promote more bloodshed of the innocent, the right to freedom of expression needs
circumspection and consequential restraint for greater good of the society.
Furthermore, the media whether print or electronic, should be guided by the

11
Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi, AIR 1950 SC 129
12
Royal Commission on the Press, final report (1977), pp. 8-9, ‘Dimensions of press freedom’,
Indian Press, Vol. V No. 12, December 1978 pp. 9-12.
13
Sushil Choudhary v. State of Tripura, AIR 1998 Gau. 28
14
Ramji Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1957 SC 620

Media and Human Rights 7

compulsion of self imposed restraint and anxiety to prevent further violation of
human right and loss of more life on account of media reporting. 15

“The maltreatment or the abuse of the Human Rights has been perceived as one of
the main drivers of contemporary furnished clashes and, simultaneously, the
assurance of Human Rights is considered as one of basic components of harmony
making and harmony building.16 It was tracked by a remarkable step towards
shaping the Human Rights i.e. the adoption of Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, 1948 which declared that “everyone is entitled to all the Rights and
freedoms set forth in this declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race,
colour, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or
other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,
jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it is independent, trust, non-self-government or under any other
limitation of sovereignty”. 17 It is imperative that the members of the international
community fulfill their solemn obligation to promote and encourage admiration for
Human Rights and Fundamental freedoms.18

In spite of the fact that the idea of 'the right to speak freely and of expression' has
been acknowledged all through the globe, basic liberties activists comment that
new dangers loom over opportunity of expression with regards to the analysis of
any religion. It should not also be equated with the right to instigate hatred and
violence. In India, freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed under Article
19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India. Article 19(1) (a) says that all citizens shall
have the right to freedom of speech and expression. But this right is subject to
reasonable restrictions imposed on the expression of this right for certain purposes
under Article 19(2). The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,
guaranteeing freedom of speech, is regarded as the root for the development of
this concept in western countries. It can be observed that Article 19(1) (a) of the
Constitution of India corresponds to the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution, which says, "congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech or of the press".19

Media for social justice: The role of legislators and the courts in their efforts to
maintain “rule of law”, usher in “economic and social justice” and administrative
apparatus needed for securing the advantages and benefits to weaker sections
have been described at length. However, the media in the country has been playing
a very significant role to the cause of social justice in a variety of ways. Despite the
15
Ram Pyari v. Union if India, AIR 1988 Raj. 124
16
Jimmy Carter’s address to Georgia Institute of Technology, February 20, 1979, quoted in AIR
1996 ournal Section at 49.
17
Article 2, UDHR, 1948
18
Principle 2, Proclamation of Tehran, Final Act of the International Conference of Human Rights
19
Prabha Dutt v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 6

Media and Human Rights 8

criticism that the media is not playing its rightful role and engaging himself in
politics of the day to the neglect of portraying the good work done by all the sectors
concerned with the task of promoting social justice, it is necessary to point out the
good work done by the media and its potentialities and capabilities to play a more
vital role in future.20 The right of a citizen to exhibit films on Doordarshan is similar
to the right of a citizen to publish his views through any other magazines,
advertisement hoardings, etc. subject to the terms and conditions of the owners of
the media.21 In Odyssey Communications Pvt. Ltd. V Lokvidayan Sanghatana 22 while
considering a citizens’ right to exhibit films, the Supreme court held as follows: -

“The right of a citizen to exhibit films on the Doordarshan subject to the terms and
conditions to be imposed by the Doordarshan is a part of the fundamental right f
the freedom of expression guaranteed under article 19(1) (a) of the constitution of
India, which can be curtailed only under circumstances which are set out in clause
(2) of article 19 of the Constitution of India. The right is similar to the right of
citizen to publish his views through any other media such as newspapers
magazines, advertisement hoarding etc. subject to the terms and conditions of the
owners of the media”

In Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v Union of India 23 this court after
pointing out that communication needs in a democratic society should be met by
the extension as specific right to inform, the right e.g., the right to be informed, the
right to inform, the right to privacy, the right to participate in public
communication, the right to communicate, etc. proceeded to observe as follows:-
The purpose of the press is to advance the pubic interest by publishing facts and
opinions without which democratic electorate cannot make responsible judgments.
Newspaper being purveyors of news and views have a bearing on public
administration, very often carry material which would not be palatable to
Governments and other authorities. The authors of the articles, which are published
in the newspapers, have to be critical of the auction of the government in order to
expose its weaknesses. Such articles tend to become on irritant or even a threat to
power.”24

Freedom of speech and expression is thus a natural right, which a human being
acquires on birth. It is therefore, a basic human right. “Everyone has the right to
freedom of opinion and expression; the right includes the freedom to hold opinions
without interference and to seek and to receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers” proclaims the universal declaration

20
See AIR 1996 Journal Section, at 52.
21
M. Hasan v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1998 AP 35
22
AIR 1988 SC 1644
23
AIR 1986 SC 515
24
Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai D. Shah, AIR 1993 SC 171

Media and Human Rights 9

of Human rights, 1948. The people of India declared in the preamble of the
constitution, which they gave unto themselves their resolve to secure all citizens,
liberty of thought and expression. This resolve is reflected in article 19(1) (a) which
is one of the Articles found in part III of the constitution which enumerates the
Fundamental Rights. The article reads as under:

“19 (1) All citizens shall have right,(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
”Article 19(2) Nothing in sub clause (a)of clause (1), shall affect the operation of
any existing law, or prevent the state from making any law, insofar as such law
imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said
sub clause in the interest of (the sovereignty and integrity of India), the security of
the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality or
in relation to contempt of Court, defamation or incitement to an offence.”

Every citizen of this free country therefore has the right to air his or her views
through the printing and or the electronic media subject to course to permissible
restrictions imposed under Article 19(2) of the constitution. 25 The print media, the
radio and the tiny screen play the role of public educators so, vital to the growth of
the healthy democracy. Freedom to air ones views is the lifetime of any democratic
institution and any attempt to stifle, suffocate or gag this right would sound a death
knell to democracy and would help usher in autocracy or dictatorship. It cannot be
gain said that modern communication medium advances public interest by
informing the public of the events and developments that have taken place and
thereby educating the voters, a role considered significant for the vibrant
functioning of a democracy.26

Consequently, broadcasting of news and views for popular utilization is a must and
any effort to refuse the same must be frowned upon except if it falls within the
ambit of Article19 (2) of the constitution. Every free citizen has an undoubted right
to lie what sentiments he pleases before the public: to forbid this, except to the
extent permitted by Article 19(2), would be an inroad on his freedom. 27 This
freedom must however, be exercised with circumspection and care must be taken
not to trench on the rights of other citizens or to prejudice public interest. It is a
manifest form Article 19(2) that the right conferred by article 19(a) to subject to
imposition of reasonable restrictions in the interest of, amongst others public order,
decency or morality or in relation to defamation or incitement to an offence. It is
therefore, obvious that subject to reasonable restrictions placed under Article 19(2)
(a) citizen has a right to publish, circulate and disseminate his views and any
attempt to thwart or deny the same would offend Article 19(a). 28

25
Walter Lipman “Liberty and the news” (1920) at 57, quoted in AIR 1996 Journal Section at 52.
26
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/printedition/011002/detFRO02.shtmlf
27
R. Metropolitan Police Commissioner, (1968) 2 QB 118
28
Kalyan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1962 SC 1183

Media and Human Rights 10

A constitutional provision is never static; it is ever evolving and ever changing and
therefore, does not admit of a narrow, pedantic or syllogistic approach. It was the
broad approach adopted by the Court, which enabled them to chart out the
contours ever expanding notions of press freedoms. In Dennis v. United States 29,
Justice Frankfurt, observed: -

“The language of the first amendment is to be read not as a barren words found in
a dictionary but as symbols of historic experience illuminated by the
presuppositions of those who employed them.”

It also recommends that "the media should play a role in peace-building activities,
by making use of anything that may foster such activities, advocating
reconciliation and upholding the values of tolerance and non-violence and the call
for human communities to live together, for example by developing innovative
programmes that allow peoples affected by armed conflict or terrorism to express
themselves, and which can create a space for dialogue by highlighting mutual
respect, collaboration and reconciliation" and emphasizes that "in order for society
to address the issues that create an environment conducive to terrorism, the
media should play a role in facilitating the open debates and discussions that are
fundamental elements of democracy."30

29
(1950) 341 US 494
30
K. N. Guruswamy v. State of Mysore, AIR 1957 Mys. 592

Media and Human Rights 11

CHAPTER III – ROLE OF MEDIA

MEDIA AS THE PROMOTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA

Since media are the eyes and ears of any democratic society, their existence
becomes detrimental to the sustenance of all democratic societies. Unless a
society knows what is happening to it and its members, the question of protecting
or promoting rights does not emerge. Hence, it is in fulfilling this function that
media justifies its existence. No doubt in India, media especially the print, has
played an important role in educating and informing citizens of their rights as well
as the violations of such rights. One cannot forget that the origin of newspapers in
India itself lay in challenging the denial of rights. Hicky’s Bengal Gazette was
begun in 1780 to challenge the autocratic rule of the East India Company. Of
course, James Augustus Hicky paid dearly for fighting for the rights and against
their violations. In South India, The Hindu, we are given to understand, constantly
attracted the wrath of the then British government, because it drew attention of
the readers to the gross violation of people’s dignity and rights. In the post –
independence India too the newspapers have constantly attracted the anger of
and harassment by the governments for trying to take the truth to the people.
Significant section of the national press has dared to oppose events that have
changed the course of history in India – Emergency, Babri Masjid demolition,
murder of Graham Steins and his children, the Godhra carnage, and recently
Nandigram. However, one cannot forget that for much of the press, the rights of
the dalits, women, rural poor, urban poor, and workers in the unorganised sector
increasingly remained outside the purview of human rights. Further, only the
human rights violations by the state against the middle class became violations of
human rights for media.31
MEDIA AS THE PROMOTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
Media is not only a witness but also a promoter of violence. The then India Today
reporter Shyam Tekwani involved in covering Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF)
operations in Sri Lanka took photographs of the Indian soldiers captured and killed
by the LTTE only to realise they used to mutilate the bodies because he would
click the photographs. During the 1992 riots, ‘mobs’ burnt more houses and other
building in order to create spectacle for the photographers. A lot of child welfare
NGOs in India have spoken about how European and American documentary film
makers have subjected street children to inhuman conditions to get better visual
impact. Communally insensitive reporting in the name of truth has not only
claimed a number of innocent human lives, but also created and perpetuated
numerous stereotypes. The way media harassed and treated Sabeel’s pregnant
Baxi, Upendra. “Two Notions of Human Rights: ‘Modern’ and ‘Contemporary’” in The Future of
31

Human Rights

Media and Human Rights 12

wife in Bangalore calls for serious reconsideration of media as fourth estate. The
above instances demand a close and serious questioning of numerous media
practices which violate or cause human rights violations.

RETHINKING THE ROLE OF MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Contrary to the belief that human rights are an uncontested terrain, there is a
vibrant history of challenging them. The questioning has been there right from the
time of the conception of human rights to the post-globalised world. The
momentum perhaps built up with signing of trade related treaties by the
‘developing and third word countries’ which expedited the process of globalisation
and the emergence of post national societies. Such claims are valid one needs to
pay attention to the politics of claims which have significant consequences in the
modern-day postcolonial societies. I wish to draw attention to only three such
issues. First, there are conceptual problems in the ‘authorship’ meta narrative.
Such a conceptualisation denies the historical experience to a society and does not
acknowledge that the present is transformed and acted upon by modernity,
thereby proposing a sanitised and linear culture, denying the plurality of culture
and societies. The claim also does not take into account the fact that with the
eleventh hour exit by the US from being a part of shaping UDHR, the UDHR
became socialist in its outlook, incorporating many a concern of the third world
nations. Second, it is important to see who is articulating such claims. In the last
two decades one notices that such claims have been increasingly voiced by
Hindutva organisations in India, and dictatorial regimes in the neighbouring
countries in Asia and Africa which have a record of human rights violations
themselves. Baxi says, “the originary stories about human rights equip dictatorial
regimes in the Third World to deny wholesale, and in retail, even the most minimal
protection from human rights violations and serves such regimes with an atrocious
impunity of power (Baxi, 2002).In India such claims hide the pre- and post -
independent nationalist politics of creating a homogenous Hindu identity, at the
cost numerous communities and cultures within the subcontinent. Third, human
rights discourse emerges in the mid-twentieth century in the background of the
experience of the two World Wars, the fear of nation-states exploiting their
subjects. It is in this context that I propose for the media a newer role. Media
needs to develop a critique of existing frameworks human rights, and develop a
plural and more nuanced discourse of human rights in the public domain. 32

32
Baxi, Upendra. “Two Notions of Human Rights: ‘Modern’ and ‘Contemporary’” inThe Future of Human
Rights
Media and Human Rights 13
CHAPTER IV – RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND MEDIA

Privacy as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary is “right of a person and the person’s
property to be free from unwarranted and undesired public scrutiny and exposure.
Privacy as a right has changed by leaps and bounds in recent times. The theory
that an action may lie for the invasion of the right of privacy or as it has been said,
the right to be let alone was propounded in 1890 by two American lawyers- Samuel
D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis.33
Right to privacy as an independent and distinctive concept originated in the field of
Law of Torts, under which a new cause of action for damages resulting from
unlawful invasion of privacy was recognised. This right has two aspects, which are
but two faces of the same coin:
(1) the general law of privacy which affords a tort action for damages resulting
from an unlawful invasion of privacy; and
(2) the constitutional recognition given to the right of privacy which protects
personal privacy from unlawful governmental invasion. If interference with privacy
is of such a nature as to amount to a recognised tort, resort to that tort action may
be taken to prevent interference.34
Article 12 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) defines Right to Privacy
as—No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family,
home or correspondence not to attack upon his honour and reputation. Everyone
has the right to protection of law against such interference or attack.

Sting Operation vis-à-vis Right to Privacy

Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India provides for nothing in sub-clause (a) that
shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevents
the state from, making any law relating to libel, slander, defamation, contempt of
court or any matter which offends decency or morality or which determines the
security of, or tends to overthrow the state.
On the other hand, ‘Freedom of Press’ has been held to be a part of the
Fundamental Right of ‘Freedom of Speech and expression’ guaranteed by article
19(1)(a) to the citizens of India. It has been held that ‘Freedom of Press’ is
necessary for exercise of fundamental freedom of citizens of ‘speech and
expression’, and so ‘Freedom of Press’ cannot be termed as unconstitutional and
void. As the Constitution expressly states, this can only be exercised till it does not
harm the decency/morality of a person. The Constitution of India gives full liberty
to press but with definite strings attached, which are classified and specifically

33
Selected Essays on Torts, p. 122
34
Halsbury’s Laws of England

Media and Human Rights 14

denoted by the ‘reasonable restrictions’ described by Article 19(2) of Part III of the
Constitution.
In the case of Sakal Papers,35 the Supreme Court held that Article 19(2) of the
Constitution permits imposition of reasonable restrictions on the heads specified in
Article 19(2) and on no other grounds. It is, therefore, not open for the state to
curtail the Freedom of Speech and Expression for promoting the general welfare of
a section or a group of people unless its action can be justified by the law falling
under clause 2 of Article 19. And moreover it is an entirely valid contention that at
a certain point all Sting Operations do violate Right to Privacy in some degree
because during a Sting Operation, in nearly all its instances in recent history, the
person being filmed is not aware of the presence of a hidden camera. This means
that he does not consent to be filmed, without which, in ordinary course, no one
has the right to film anyone. However, it may be argued that a illegal act being
committed by a public servant during his office hours and in abuse of spirit of his
office are not worthy of protection under Right to Privacy law.
Right to Privacy is implicit in Article 21. According to Subba Rao, J., ‘liberty’ in
Article 21 is comprehensive enough to include privacy. His Lordship said that
although it is true that he does not explicitly declare the Right to Privacy as a
Fundamental Right but the right is an essential ingredient of personal liberty. It is
regarded as a Fundamental Right but cannot be called absolute. It can be restricted
on the basis of compelling public interest. The court, however, has expressly limited
this right to personal intimacies of the family, marriage, motherhood, procreation
and child bearing. On the other side, in the Sting Operations done by the media in
India, only the working of the public servants in their offices is covered and
explored in detail. The official work of the public servant should be transparent and
open to all as it is in the public interest. But according to the court’s decision, the
Right to Privacy does not cover this official work in the purview of its definition.
Thus, Sting Operations were begun by the media with a laudable objective of
exposing corruption in high places.

INDIAN PERSPECTIVE

Indian Constitution has not yet granted but only reasoned this right through
implication, as an implicit part of the aegis of certain other fundamental rights. The
existing law just affords a principle which if properly invoked may protect the
privacy of the individual and Indian judiciary has been using judicial activism to
widen the ambit of the Constitution of India, 1950, Article 21, where the seeds of
the privacy rights may be found and extending the protection granted by it. In
recent times, however, this right has acquired a constitutional status. This journey
began in 1963, when for the first time the issue regarding Right to Privacy was
35
AIR 1962 SC 305

Media and Human Rights 15

raised in Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh. 36 The Question was whether Right
to Privacy might be implied from existing Fundamental Rights in the Constitution of
India, 1950, Articles 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e) and 21. The Majority opinion was that our
Constitution does not in express terms confer any such right on the citizens.
Minority opinion (SUBBA RAO, J.) was in favour of inferring right to privacy from
right to personal liberty under the Constitution of India, 1950, Article 21.
This right again came for examination before the Supreme Court of India in Govind
v. State of Madhya Pradesh,37 and this time Supreme Court took a more elaborate
view and accepted a limited right to privacy as an emanation from Articles 19 (1)
(a), 19 (1)(d) and 21. It was also said that the right is not absolute. So, reasonable
restriction may be imposed on this right. These restrictions must be the same as
are provided under the Constitution of India, 1950, Article 19, clause 2.

NEW FACETS OF PRIVACY

'Privacy' has been defined as "the rightful claim of an individual to determine to

which he wishes to share himself with others and control over the time, place and
circumstances to communicate with others". It means the individual's right to
control dissemination of information about him. Disclosure of certain facts, events,
actions, photographs, videotapes, in any form of media, print or celluloid, internet
would cause embarrassment, agony emotional stress, to a person of reasonable
sensitiveness. 'Right of Privacy' in other words can be said "to be let alone". What is
information to others according to a journalist could be a personal and sensitive
information to an individual in a litigation relating to matrimonial dispute. The
boundary between freedom of press and privacy of individual is the "Lakshman
Rekha" and if the media crosses the line of boundary, the invasion starts. 38 Privacy
provisions have just worsened due to the recent rage of sting operations. The false
and fabricated sting operations have raised questions on accountability of media. 39
Starting from 2001 Tehelka exposure, which compelled the defence minister and
others to resign, the present sting operation just exposed the new facets
endangering the right to privacy.
In a recent case, a 40-year-old schoolteacher in Delhi was labelled as a pimp by a
sting operation conducted by a TV news channel. Later it was proved that it was a
false sting operation that not only defamed the schoolteacher and infringed upon
her right to privacy, but also caused public humiliation and grievous bodily harm to
her person. What is required under these circumstances is responsible media.
Hence it may be said whether there is the crossing of the thin line, which is

36
AIR 1963 SC 1295
37
AIR 197
38
R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu: AIR 1995 SC 264
39
Ibid

Media and Human Rights 16

between the private interest and public interest is the litmus test for accepting the
credibility of any of the sting operations.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION

Enacted in the year 2005, the Right to Information Act, 2005 tries to strike a
balance between public interest and private interest. It has led the information from
the public authorities out of the ambit of the right to privacy. It facilitates citizens
to secure access to the information under the control of public authorities, which in
a way results in transparency and accountability. The concept of the democratic
ideas being paramount is maintained.

OTHER ASPECTS OF MEDIA INFRINGEMENT ON PRIVACY

Apart from these operations, there are also other planned means engaged in by the
media to get hold of information about private people that can result in to a
violation of an individual’s right to privacy. Many significant legal precedents for this
are found in U.S. legal history. For instance, in the case of Dietemann, 40 the plaintiff
was a plumber who practiced medicine at home without a license. A Life Magazine
reporter, accompanied by a photographer and working with the local district
attorney, posed as a couple to get into his living room to obtain information for
criminal prosecution. They used a hidden tape recorder and camera. The plumber
was arrested and pleaded no contest. However, he sued for invasion of privacy. The
Ninth Circuit upheld the decision, stating the reason as use of false identity. The
judge also expressly stated as follows:
"The First Amendment is not a license to trespass, to steal, or to intrude by
electronic means into the precincts of another's home or office. It does not become
a license simply because the person subjected to the intrusion is reasonably
suspected of committing a crime."
In the case of Stephens’s v West Australian Newspapers Ltd. 41 a similar conclusion
was reached by the High Court of Australia. McHugh J explained:
“The quality of life and freedom of the ordinary individual are highly dependent on
the exercise of functions and powers vested in public representatives and officials
by a vast legal and bureaucratic apparatus funded by public monies. How, when,
why and where those functions and powers are or are not exercised are matters of
real and legitimate concern to every member of the community, so is the
performance of the public representatives and officials who are invested with them?
In several cases the Supreme Court has held that "where a newspaper publishes
truthful information which it has lawfully obtained, punishment may lawfully be

40
Dietemann v. Time Inc. (9th Cir. 1971)
41
(1992) 182 CLR 211

Media and Human Rights 17

imposed, if at all, only when narrowly tailored to a state interest of the highest
order."42
In a number of intense cases of media speculation and sensationalized news
coverage, images and video is taken of private persons (particularly celebrity
figures and/or people who might be of public interest) in their private homes or in
other private areas. This is clearly illegal, and is punishable by law as an
infringement of the right to privacy. However, it must be remembered here that
even if a news organization arguably violates a subject’s right to privacy, the
subject’s remedy usually will not include the ability to bar the publication of the
picture.43 Hence, the redressal that the plaintiff can receive is usually strictly
monetary in nature, and he/she cannot usually gain an injunction against the use of
the disagreeable photographic or video graphic material. Thus, regardless of the
Court’s action, the plaintiff’s right to privacy will have been infringed upon by the
media’s actions, without proper compensation. Several television shows were
designed around the raw footage obtained from such law enforcement operations.
However, several cases44 were filed before the U.S. Supreme Court by private
persons, alleging that the presence of media crews in their private homes, taking
photos and videos and recording their observations, compromised the privacy to
which they were constitutionally entitled. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in
favour of the plaintiffs in both cases, stating that though the presence of the news
crews inside the private homes had been authorised by state authorities, it still
amounted to a breach of personal privacy.
The European Court of Human Rights in Jersild v. Denmark 45 held thus:
“Whilst the press must not overstep the bounds set, inter alia, in the interest of 'the
protection of the reputation and rights of others', it is nevertheless incumbent on it
to impart information and ideas of public interest. Not only does the press have the
task of imparting such information and ideas: the public also has a right to receive
them. Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of 'public
watchdog.”

42
Florida Star v. B.J.F., 491 U.S. 524, 541 (1989)
43
See CBS, Inc. v. Davis, 114 S.Ct. 912 (Blackmun, Circuit Justice 1994)
44
Ayeni v. CBS, Inc. 1994
45
(1995) 19 EHRR 1 (Para 31 at page 25)

Media and Human Rights 18

CHAPTER V - TRIAL BY MEDIA: THE REAL SCENARIO
AND THE INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM

One of the fundamental rights that are guaranteed to every citizen of India (and
most democratic countries, for that matter) is the right to a free and fair trial. It is
considered to not merely be a modern legal right, but also an essential principle of
natural justice and, thus, has certain connotations and implications that extend
beyond its strict legal character. In short, the right to a free and fair trial is
considered sacrosanct and inviolable in most modern democracies, and is an
essential part of modern democratic justice systems. If this fundamental right is not
ensured to all individuals and entities that are indicted in a court of law, then the
integrity of the court and the legal system will have been effectively compromised
itself.

Right to a fair trial is an absolute right of every individual within the territorial limits
of India vides Articles 14 and 20, 21 and 22 of the Constitution. The right to a fair
trial effectively flows from Article 21 of the constitution to be read with Article 14. It
must be noted here that the legal concept of fair trial is not purely for the private
benefit for an accused – the publics’ confidence in the integrity of the justice
system is crucial, as stated in Gisborne Herald Co. Ltd. V. Solicitor General. 46The
right to a fair trial is at the heart of the Indian criminal justice system. It
encompasses several other rights including the right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty, the right not to be compelled to be a witness against oneself, the
right to a public trial, the right to legal representation, the right to speedy trial, the
right to be present during trial and examine witnesses, etc. In the case of Zahira
Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat47 the Supreme Court explained that a “fair
trial obviously would mean a trial before an impartial Judge, a fair prosecutor and
atmosphere of judicial calm. Fair trial means a trial in which bias or prejudice for or
against the accused, the witnesses, or the cause which is being tried is eliminated.”

The essential aim of contention here is to what extent the Freedom of the Press (as
implied in the Constitution of India), and the right to a free and fair trial can co-
exist in modern Indian society. Freedom of speech and expression incorporated
under Article 19 (1) (a) has been put under ‘reasonable restriction’ subject to
Article 19 (2) and Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Court Act. Of special note here,
however, is the rise of electronic media in recent times, which has changed the
landscape of media coverage entirely. The rise of sensationalist news reporting on
criminal issues is unmistakable, and its effect on the judicial process, however
subtle and insidious, cannot be ignored.

46
1995 (3) NZLR 563 (CA)
47
(2004) 4 SCC 158

Media and Human Rights 19

These days, what we observe is media trial where the media itself effectively does a
separate ‘investigation’ of its own, thus constructing public opinion against the
accused even before the court takes cognizance of the case. By this way, it
prejudices the public and sometimes even judges and as a result the accused
person, who should be assumed innocent until proven guilty under the aegis of the
principle of Free Trial, is presumed as a convicted criminal, endangering his rights
and personal liberty. If excessive publicity in the media about a suspect or an
accused before trial prejudices a fair trial or results in characterizing him as a
person who had indeed committed the crime and thus has a significant chance of
colouring the proceedings of the case, it amounts to undue interference with the
“administration of justice”, calling for proceedings for contempt of court against the
media. Unfortunately, rules designed to regulate journalistic conduct are
inadequate to prevent the encroachment of civil rights. An example of trial by
media was the murder case of Aarushi Talwar, in which extensive media reports
laid the blame for the murder first on her father, Dr. Rajesh Talwar, and then on
her mother, Nupur Talwar, despite the fact that there was no substantial forensic
evidence to suggest that either had been involved in the crime. In fact, these
reports were made even before a thorough police investigation into the crime had
commenced. These reckless media reports painted the formerly respectable Dr.
Talwar as a public hate figure, and incited public opinion against him. Later on, an
official CBI forensic report confirmed neither Dr. Talwar nor his wife had anything to
do with the crime, but the damage to their reputation had already been done. How
can one expect a fair and well-reasoned judgment from a judge who is under such
tremendous pressure from all sections of the society? A person is presumed to be
innocent unless he is held guilty by the competent court, but here the trend on the
part of the media is to declare a person guilty right at the time of arrest. The
media’s express duty and function is to report facts or news and raise public issues
for constructive analysis and debate; passing judgments on a judicial matter is not
part of the media’s sphere of activity, but that is effectively what the modern-day
media does on a regular basis. The Right to Justice of a victim can often be
compromised in other ways as well, especially in rape and sexual assault cases, in
which often, the past sexual history of a prosecutrix may find its way into
newspapers, thus having a possible effect on the outcome of the case in question.
Even if the accused are acquitted by the court on the grounds of proof beyond
reasonable doubt, they cannot resurrect their previous image. Such kind of
exposure provided to them is likely to jeopardize all these cherished rights
accompanying liberty, a life of dignity stands to be adversely affected by the social
stigma they are forced to bear for the rest of their lives on account of the
exaggerated and occasionally blatantly untruthful reports presented in the media.
This point of view was propounded by Jagannadha Rao. 48

48
Fair Trial and Free Press: Law’s Response to Trial by Media

Media and Human Rights 20

Through media trail, we have started to create pressure on the lawyers even — to
not take up cases of accused, thus forcing these accused to go to trial without any
defense. This is clearly a blatant violation of the accused party’s natural rights, and
this violation occurs only because of the media’s coverage of the matter. Every
person has a right to get himself represented by a lawyer of his choice and put his
point before the adjudicating court and no one has the right to debar him from
doing so, or to influence proceedings to such an extent that it becomes inordinately
difficult for the accused to obtain a defence attorney. For an instance, when
eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani decided to defend Manu Sharma, the prime
accused in the Jessica Lal case 49, he was subjected to public derision. A senior
editor of the television news channel CNN-IBN described the decision to represent
Sharma as an attempt to “defend the indefensible”. The State had appointed one of
the best lawyers of the country, Gopal Subramaniam, to handle its case, and Mr.
Sharma’s case was handed to a far more inexperienced lawyer. The media severely
criticized Mr. Jethmalani for attempting to take the case and portrayed him as a
villain motivated by personal gain. Regardless of the amount of evidence that had
been brought to bear against Mr. Sharma and the likelihood of his being found
guilty, the fact remains that he was entitled to the attorney of his choice and a free
and fair trial by the Constitution – a right that was effectively denied to him by the
media coverage of the case. The media also tends to create varied problems for
witnesses in a case subjected to excessive media speculation. If the identity of
witnesses is published, there is an imminent danger of the witnesses coming under
pressure both from the accused or his associates as well as from the police. At the
earliest possible stage, the witnesses tend to retract their statements and,
understandably, try their best to protect their own privacy and self-interest.
Witness protection is then under threat. Cardozo, one of the greatest Judges of the
American Supreme Court, referring to the “forces which enter into the conclusions
of Judges” observed that “the great tides and currents which engulf the rest of men
do not turn aside in their curse and pass the Judges by”. 50 Therefore, though Lord
Denning stated in the Court of Appeal that Judges will not be influenced by the
media publicity,51 his view, which was later, rejected in the House of Lords. Thus, it
is a commonly accepted notion that judges can, sub-consciously, be subjected to
unnatural pressures from excessive media speculation about an ongoing case,
which is clearly an infringement on the accused party’s right to a free trial.

The most comprehensive research on the positive and negative aspects of media
trial has been elaborated in 200th report of the Law Commission entitled Trial by
Media: Free Speech vs. Fair Trial Under Criminal Procedure (Amendments to the

49
Siddhartha Vashisht vs. The State, AIR 2008 SC 2889
50
Nature of the Judicial Process’, Lecture IV, Adherence to Precedent. The Subconscious Element in
the Judicial Process, 1921, Yale University Press.
51
Attorney General v. BBC : 1981 AC 303 (CA), p. 315)

Media and Human Rights 21

Contempt of Court Act, 1971) 52 that has made recommendations to address the
damaging effect of sensationalized news reports on the administration of justice. It
also reportedly recommends that the High Court be empowered to direct
postponement of publication or telecast in criminal cases. The report noted that at
present, under Section 3 (2) of the Contempt of Court Act, such publications would
be contempt only if a charge sheet had been filed in a criminal case. The
Commission has suggested that the starting point of a criminal case should be from
the time of arrest of an accused and not from the time of filing of the charge sheet.
In the perception of the Commission such an amendment would prevent the media
from prejudging or prejudicing the case. Another controversial recommendation
suggested was to empower the High Court to direct a print or an electronic media
to postpone publication or telecast pertaining to a criminal case and to restrain the
media from resorting to such publication or telecast. The 17th Law Commission has
made recommendations to the Centre to enact a law to prevent the media from
reporting anything prejudicial to the rights of the accused in criminal cases from the
time of arrest, during investigation and trial.

In this lays the crux of the issue, and the fundamental problem that legislators face
in their attempts to pose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of the press to
protect the interests of the parties involved in a case and prevent the infringement
of their fundamental rights. The measures proposed by the Law Commission would
essentially impose certain terms of pre-censorship on the media of the country, as
it would prevent them from broadcasting and propagating coverage of certain sub
judice matters that the Court considers to be sensitive in nature. Pre-censoring of
media (especially newspapers) is considered to be expressly illegal in India, with
several significant legal precedents like the case of Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v.
Indian Express.53

52
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/rep200.pdf
53
AIR 1989 SC 190

Media and Human Rights 22

CHAPTER VI – CONCLUSION

The approval of Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations on

10th November 2008 marked the culmination of Human struggle for freedom and
liberty. It can be accomplished that Human Rights are claim, made by virtue of the
fact that we are Human beings with an inalienable Right to Human dignity. The
term “Human Rights” are very significant for every democratic society. Economic,
social and cultural Rights are indispensable components of sustainable expansion
and therefore not possible without respect for Human Rights.

Regardless what country or continent we come from we are all basically the same
human beings. We have the common human needs and concerns. We all seek
happiness and try to avoid suffering regardless of our race, religion, sex or political
status. Human beings, indeed all-sentient beings, have the right to pursue
happiness and live in peace and in freedom. As free human beings we can use our
unique intelligence to try to understand our world and ourselves. But if we are
prevented from using our creative potential, we are deprived of one of the basic
characteristics of a human being. It is very often the most gifted, dedicated and
creative members of our society who become victims of human rights abuses. Thus
the political, social, cultural and economic developments of a society are obstructed
by the violations of human rights. Therefore, the protection of these rights and
freedoms are of immense importance both for the individuals affected and for the
development of the society as a whole. United Nations shall promote “universal
respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all
without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.” 54

One ought to keep in mind that fundamental right of free expression also includes
fair comment and criticism and as has been pointed out by Chief Justice (retd.) P.B.
Gajendragadkar the freedom of expression of opinion “does not mean tolerance of
the expression of opinions with which one agrees but tolerance of the expression of
opinions which one positively dislikes or even abhors.” Scrutiny of public figures by
the fourth estate is a stipulation, which cannot be done away with.

It ought not be forgotten that the press has a duty to show that it serves public
interest at large. It is also the essential duty of press to strike that proper balance
between citizens right to privacy and public’s right to information vis-à-vis the role
of media i.e. the press. The press should show their functional accountability. It has
to be remembered that this freedom of press is not absolute, unlimited and
unfettered at all times and in all circumstances as giving an unrestricted freedom of
the speech and expression would amount to an uncontrolled licence. If it were
wholly free even from reasonable restraints it would lead to disorder and anarchy.
54
Charter of the United Nations, Art. 55(c)

Media and Human Rights 23

The freedom is not to be mis-understood as to be a press free to disregard its duty
to be responsible. In fact, the element of responsibility must be present in the
conscience of the journalists. In an organised society, the rights of the press have
to be recognised with its duties and responsibilities towards the society. Public
order, decency, morality and such other things must be safeguarded. The
protective cover of press freedom must not be thrown open for wrong doings. If a
newspaper publishes what is improper, mischievously false or illegal and abuses its
liberty it must be punished by Court of Law. Certain restrictions are essential even
for preservation of the freedom of the press itself.

To quote from the report of Mons Lopez to the Economic and Social Council of the
United Nations:

“If it is true that human progress is impossible without freedom, then it is no less
true that ordinary human progress is impossible without a measure of regulation
and discipline”. It is the duty of a true and responsible journalist to strive to inform
the people with accurate and impartial presentation of news and their views after
dispassionate evaluation of the facts and information received by them and to be
published as a news item. The presentation of the news should be truthful,
objective and comprehensive without any false and distorted expression. 55

It is the task of the media to ensure objectivity of commercial decision making by

fearless and honest reporting so that the averment that such decisions are in the
greater good of the consumer or the public is indeed followed in principle and
spirit.56

55
In Re : Harijai Singh and Another In Re : Vijay Kumar 1996 INDLAW SC 2426
56
Petronet LNG Ltd. Indian Petro Corp. & Anr.

Media and Human Rights 24

 CHAPTER VII - BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books and Articles (accessed manually or via Google

Books) :

1. Syed M.H. Human Rights: The New Era, 2003 [Page No. – 5]
2. Yasin, Adil-ul and Archana Upadhyay, Human Rights, (New Delhi, 2004), [Page
No. – 5]
3. Nature of the Judicial Process’, Lecture IV, Adherence to Precedent. The
Subconscious Element in the Judicial Process, 1921, Yale University Press [Page
No. – 21]
4. Halsbury’s Laws of England [Page No. -14]
5. Baxi Upendra, ‘Two notions of Human Rights: Modern and Contemporary’
[Page Nos. – 12 and 13]
6. Fair Trial and Free Press: Law’s Response to Trial by Media [Page No. – 20]
7. Selected Essays on The Law of Torts [Page No. – 14]

Statutes:

8. The Constitution of India,1949 [Page Nos. – 4,5,7-11,14-16 and 19]

9. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1993 [Page Nos. –
5,7,8,10,14 and 23]
10. The Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action, 1993 [Page No. -3]
11. Constitution of Jamaica, 1962 [Page No. – 4]
12. Proclamation of Tehran, Final Act of the International Conference on Human
Rights, 1968 [Page No. – 8]
13. Declaration of the Rights of Men and citizens of France, 1789 [Page No. – 3]
14. Charter of the United Nations, 1945 [Page Nos. – 4 and 23]

Websites:

1. https://www.manupatra.com (used for case laws)

2. https://www.scconline.com (used for case laws)
3. http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/rep200.pdf [Page No. –22]
Media and Human Rights 25
4. https://www.lexisnexis.com (used for case laws)
5. http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/printedition/011002/detFRO02.shtmlf
[Page No. – 10]

Journals and Reports:

1. All India Report (used for case laws)

2. Supreme Court Cases (used for case laws)
3. Royal Commission on the Press, final report (1977), ‘Dimensions of press
freedom’, Indian Press, Vol. V No. 12, December 1978. [Page No. – 7]

TURNITIN REPORT

Media and Human Rights 26