{"id":52236,"date":"2025-08-26T21:10:10","date_gmt":"2025-08-26T15:40:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/?p=52236"},"modified":"2025-08-27T16:24:12","modified_gmt":"2025-08-27T10:54:12","slug":"commercial-prohibited-speeches-not-fundamental-rights-sc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/26-08-2025\/commercial-prohibited-speeches-not-fundamental-rights-sc","title":{"rendered":"Commercial &amp; Prohibited Speeches Not Part of Fundamental Rights: SC"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Syllabus: GS2\/ Polity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>In News<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Supreme Court of India recently clarified that commercial and prohibited speeches do not enjoy protection under the<strong> Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)).<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The ruling reinforces the idea that Fundamental Rights are<strong> not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-background\" style=\"background-color:#ebecf0\"><tbody><tr><td><strong>Constitutional Background<\/strong><br>&#8211; <strong>Article 19(1)(a):<\/strong> Guarantees all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression.<br>&#8211; Includes political speech, dissent, press freedom, artistic expression, etc.<br>&#8211; <strong>Article 19(2):<\/strong> The State may impose restrictions on speech in the interests of Sovereignty &amp; integrity of India, Security of the State, Friendly relations with foreign States, Public order, Decency or morality, Contempt of court etc.&nbsp;<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Supreme Court\u2019s Key Observations<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Commercial speech: <\/strong>E.g., advertisements, profit-driven promotions do not automatically get the same fundamental protection as political or social speech.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Prohibited\/Hate Speech: <\/strong>Expressions promoting enmity, hatred, or violence against any group based on inherent characteristics are not constitutionally protected.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Accountability of Influencers:<\/strong> Influencers with large audiences must exercise responsibility and caution, as irresponsible speech causes harm or ridicule to specific communities\u2014especially vulnerable ones like the disabled.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Social Media Guidelines: <\/strong>The Supreme Court directed the government to frame comprehensive guidelines for regulating online content to curb harm and ensure accountability.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Evolution of Jurisprudence on Speech<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Indian Express v. Union of India (1985):<\/strong> Press freedom recognized as part of Article 19(1)(a).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Tata Press Ltd. v. MTNL (1995):<\/strong> Commercial speech like advertisements promoting consumer welfare were held to be protected, but not all commercial activity qualifies.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014):<\/strong> Laid down the \u201ccommunity standards test\u201d for obscenity.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): <\/strong>Struck down<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/13-10-2022\/section-66a-of-it-act-2\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/13-10-2022\/section-66a-of-it-act-2\"> Section 66A of IT Act<\/a> as it violated free speech.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Laws Governing Commercial &amp; Prohibited Speech in India<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Consumer Protection Act, 2019: <\/strong>Regulates misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Establishes<strong> Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) <\/strong>with power to ban misleading ads.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Sec. 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000: <\/strong>prohibits publishing obscene material in electronic form.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986: <\/strong>Bans derogatory portrayal of women in ads, publications, media.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 \/ Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023:<\/strong> Defamation (Sec. 499 IPC \/ Sec. 354 BNS), Promoting enmity between groups (Sec. 153A IPC \/ Sec. 194 BNS) &amp; Obscenity (Sec. 292\u2013294 IPC \/ Sec. 282 BNS).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Source: TH<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<h3><strong>In News<\/strong><\/h3>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">The Supreme Court of India recently clarified that commercial and prohibited speeches do not enjoy protection under the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)).<\/li>\n<p><\/p>\n<h3><strong>Supreme Court\u2019s Key Observations<\/strong><\/h3>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Commercial speech: E.g., advertisements, profit-driven promotions do not automatically get the same fundamental protection as political or social speech.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Prohibited\/Hate Speech: Expressions promoting enmity, hatred, or violence against any group based on inherent characteristics are not constitutionally protected.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Accountability of Influencers: Influencers with large audiences must exercise responsibility and caution, as irresponsible speech causes harm or ridicule to specific communities\u2014especially vulnerable ones like the disabled.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Social Media Guidelines: The Supreme Court directed the government to frame comprehensive guidelines for regulating online content to curb harm and ensure accountability.<\/li>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/26-08-2025\/commercial-prohibited-speeches-not-fundamental-rights-sc\" class=\"btn btn-primary btn-sm float-end\">Read\u00a0More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":52271,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52236","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-current-affairs"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/wp-images.nextias.com\/cdn-cgi\/image\/format=auto\/ca\/uploads\/2025\/08\/commercial-prohibited-speeches-not-fundamental-rights-sc.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52236","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52236"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52236\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":52318,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52236\/revisions\/52318"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/52271"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52236"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52236"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52236"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}