Introduction
The Indian media, which is composed of print, television, radio and digital formats, forms a constitutionally guaranteed area of people to communicate. The freedom of speech and expression granted by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, has been widely expanded by the judiciary to cover the freedom of the press. This is, however, not unconditional as Article 19(2) provides that there are justifiable limitations to avoid where the development of liberty into license occurs.
The digital revolution has affected the dynamics of communication significantly since the number of participants is vast, and information communication is democratized. It has, however, at the same time presented a new range of problems, including the spread of disinformation, media ownership anonymity, privacy violations, and the troubling phenomenon of trial by media.
Given the fast-changing legislative and techno-legal processes of 2024 and onward, a recent evaluation of media freedom in India should take into consideration recent court decisions and policy changes. I am arguing that media is an inseparable component of democracy- informing citizens, influencing the opinion of the populace, and keeping the power on the shoulder. However, the absence of responsibility should never be a companion of freedom. The freedom of the press and its responsibility is the pillar of a healthy media system, and this discussion aims at critically assessing how the former benefits the system and the means of limiting its possible abuse.
Recent Changes Characterizing the Striking Balance Between the Freedom and Accountability of the Media (2024-2025)
- March 2024 – Supreme Court Preliminarily Halts Factcheck Unit (FCU): The Court also suspended a notification by the Union Government that brought into effect a Fact Check Unit pursuant to the amended IT Rules,2021. The FCU was to designate fake or false information concerning government business. According to the Court, such uncontrolled authority may cause censorship, which would pose a threat to the freedom of speech provided in Article 19(1) (a). This temporary injunction served as an excellent example of judicial restraint concerning executive overreach as far as the regulation of digital content is concerned.
- September 2024 – Indian High Court FCU Amendment Invalidated by Bombay Court (Kunal 2 and another vs Union of India): The Bombay high court delivered a ruling on the FCU amendment as unconstitutional because the rule was seen to be vague, arbitrary and it had a chilling effect to online expression. It confirmed that the State cannot unilaterally determine what is fake news hence safeguarding democratic dissent and journalistic liberty.
Case Against TRP Scam Closed by Special PMLA Court (Mumbai): October 2024
The money-laundering case filed against the Enforcement Directorate by a Special PMLA Court was dismissed in the purported TRP Scam. The shutdown revealed the weaknesses in the television rating system and media malpractices that are geared towards swelling TRPs. The case reinstated the discussions of need to have transparent audience measurements as well as ethical self-regulation in the media.
- 2024, May 20 – Release of News Click Editor Prabir Purkayastha: The Court nullified the News Click editor, Prabir Purkayastha arrest against the UAPA. It believed that the reasons to arrest were not provided, which were against the constitutional rights to liberty and due process. This ruling highlighted the fact that the laws of national security should not be used to curb the journalistic dissent.
- May 2025 – World Press Freedom Rankings: India had been ranked 151 of 180 countries claiming RSF World Press Freedom Index 2025. Political pressure, financial pressure and intimidation of the journalists were identified by the report as the major causes of the fall. The less position is an indication of a growing gap between ideals in the constitution and the realities of media in India.
- August 2024 – Withdrawal of Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024: Severe criticism of the media bodies and civil society made the government withdraw the draft Broadcasting Services Bill. It was criticized as giving too much state control over TV, OTT content, and digital content in the Bill. The fact that it withdrew was seen as a success of free speech and public scrutiny proving the strength of civil action.
Arguments in Favour – The Constructive Power of Media
Media: Watchdog of the People
The ability of the media to serve as a dog of democracy and hold the people in power accountable is one of the most effective roles of the media. Investigative journalism has revealed some of the biggest scandals of recent times which include the 2G Spectrum Case and the Commonwealth Games Scam which people have judged, and the courts have dealt with. This role makes governance more transparent and more likely to attract public confidence in that governance.
Legal Context: In Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950) … freedom of press forms the essence of Article 19(1)(a).
The Role of Media as a Teacher and Emergency Communicator
… COVID-19 outbreak example …
Digital Platforms as a Source of Power
… #MeToo, Justice for SSR …
Media as a Watchdog of Rights and Justice
… Article 21 and suo motu actions …
Arguments Against – The Abuse and Lapse of Media
TRP Race and Sensationalism
… 2020 TRP Scam …
Trial by Media – Weakening of Fair Trial
… Sushant Singh Rajput case …
Population of Fake News and Disinformation
… FCU criticism and 2024 Bombay HC ruling …
Influence of Political Affiliations and Corporate Interests
… RSF rank 151 …
Invasion of Privacy and Ethical Violations
… Justice K.S. Puttaswamy … DPDP Act 2023 …
Freedom with Accountability – My Reasoned View
- Media Ownership Disclosure Act
- Independent Media Ethics Authority
- Privacy Code for Journalists (DPDP Act, 2023)
- Media Literacy Programs
- Due Process Rights of Journalists
Legal Safeguards Governing Media in India
| Law / Article | Key Protection or Restriction |
|---|---|
| Article 19(1)(a) | Guarantees freedom of speech and expression, including freedom of the press. |
| Article 19(2) | Permits reasonable restrictions in the interests of sovereignty, security, public order, decency, and defamation. |
| Article 21 | Protects dignity, privacy, and fair trial rights. |
| Press Council of India Act, 1978 | Sets ethical standards for print media and enables censure for violations. |
| Cable Television Networks Act, 1995 | Regulates broadcast content through Programme Code. |
| Information Technology Act, 2000 | Governs digital publication and empowers government to block unlawful online content. |
| Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 | Restrains prejudicial media coverage affecting justice. |
| Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 | Statutory protection of personal data and privacy in journalism. |
Conclusion
The press has a dual role to play in the modern Indian society … It is only in such circumstances that the media can have its high mission, of shedding the light and not misusing it and confronting instead of sensationalizing.
