Article 19

Article 19 of the Indian Constitution guarantees fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. These rights empower citizens to express themselves, participate in public affairs, and engage in socio-economic activities. While these freedoms are essential for democracy, they are subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, morality, and national integrity. The Supreme Court has clarified the scope of Article 19 through landmark judgments, emphasizing the balance between individual liberties and state concerns. Overall, Article 19 serves as a cornerstone of democratic governance, promoting individual liberties while ensuring responsibility and adherence to constitutional principles.

Originally, Article 19 included seven rights. However, the right to acquire, hold, and dispose of property was removed by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Now, the right to property is only Constitutional Right under 300A. These six remaining rights are safeguarded only against state action and do not apply to actions by private individuals. Furthermore, these rights are exclusively available to Indian citizens and shareholders of a company, excluding foreigners or legal entities such as corporations. The State is permitted to impose "reasonable" restrictions on the exercise of these six rights only based on the grounds specified in Article 19 itself and not on any other basis.

Article 19 of the Indian Constitution protects six fundamental rights for all citizens, which include:

• Right to freedom of speech and expression.
• Right to assemble peaceably and without arms.
• Right to form associations or unions or cooperative societies.
• Right to move freely throughout the territory of India.
• Right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India.
• Right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business.

1. Freedom of Speech and Expression-Article 19(1)(a)ensures that citizens have the right to freely express their thoughts, opinions, and ideas. This encompasses various forms of expression, including speech, writing, printing, visual representations, or any other means of communication.
   • However, it is important to note that this right is not absolute, and reasonable restrictions can be imposed in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign nations, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation, incitement to an offense, or the sovereignty and integrity of Parliament.
   • In the 2015 case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act was challenged due to numerous arrests made under its provisions, sparking widespread public outrage over its potential infringement on freedom of speech and expression. The petitioners argued that this provision, which permitted arrests for posting "offensive" or "menacing" content online, violated constitutional rights. The Supreme Court of India struck down Section 66A, ruling it unconstitutional due to its vagueness and susceptibility to misuse, thus safeguarding the right to freedom of speech and expression in the digital realm
   • The issue of Hate Speech
     • Freedom of speech and expression does not encompass hate speech. Hate speech, which incites hatred or violence against a specific group or individuals, is not protected under the right to freedom of speech and expression. It is deemed illegal and can lead to criminal prosecution.
   • Indian films different from other forms of Expression
     • Indian films are distinct from other forms of expression due to their wide reach and significant influence on society. Recognizing this unique characteristic, films undergo pre-censorship in India, making them the only medium subject to such regulation. In the case of K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of censorship for films, stating that it falls within the scope of Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The court treated motion pictures differently from other art forms, acknowledging their potential to evoke emotions more profoundly than any other medium.
2. Freedom to Assemble Peacefully - Article 19(1)(b) enables individuals to gather and conduct public meetings or processions without arms in a peaceful manner. This right empowers citizens to assemble for various purposes, including protests, demonstrations, or discussions.
   • However, reasonable restrictions can be placed on this right in the interests of maintaining public order and ensuring the sovereignty and integrity of India.
3. Freedom to form Associations or Unions - Article 19(1)(c) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to form associations or unions. Citizens are afforded the freedom to establish social, cultural, economic, or political associations or unions, enabling them to collectively pursue shared goals or interests.
   • However, reasonable restrictions can be placed on this right in the interests of maintaining public order, upholding morality, or safeguarding the sovereignty and integrity of India.
4. Freedom of Movement: Article 19(1)(d) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to move freely throughout the territory of India. Citizens have the freedom to travel within the country, reside in any part of India, and settle in any place of their choice.
   • However, reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right in the interests of the general public and protection of interests of any scheduled tribe.
   • The Supreme Court has ruled that the freedom of movement of prostitutes can be restricted on the grounds of public health and in the interest of public morals. Additionally, the Bombay High Court has validated restrictions on the movement of individuals affected by AIDS, emphasizing the importance of public health and safety in limiting certain freedoms when necessary.
5. Freedom of Residence: Article 19(1)(e) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to reside and settle in any part of India. Citizens possess the freedom to select their place of residence and establish themselves anywhere within the country.
   • However, reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right in the interests of the general public and protection of interests of any scheduled tribes.
   • The Supreme Court has ruled that certain areas can be prohibited for specific individuals, such as prostitutes and habitual offenders, in order to uphold public order and safety. It is evident from the above that the right to residence and the right to movement share some overlap. Both rights are complementary to each other, ensuring that citizens have the freedom to choose their place of residence while also regulating movement in certain circumstances to uphold public welfare and security.
6. Freedom of Profession/Occupation -All citizens are afforded the right to practice any profession or carry on any occupation, trade, or business.
   • Reasonable Restrictions -The State is empowered to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of this right in the interest of the general public.
   • Also, the State is authorized to:
     • Prescribe professional or technical qualifications deemed necessary for practicing any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade, or business.
     • Engage in trade, business, industry, or service itself, whether to the exclusion (complete or partial) of citizens or otherwise, without the need to justify its monopoly.
   • This right does not extend to the carrying on of a profession, business, trade, or occupation that is:
     • Immoral, such as trafficking in women or children.
     • Dangerous, involving harmful drugs or explosives, among others.
   • License: The State has the authority to prohibit such activities entirely or regulate them through licensing procedures.

While Article 19 guarantees certain freedoms, it is essential to recognize that these rights come with responsibilities. Citizens must exercise their freedoms responsibly, respecting the rights of others and the broader interests of society. Moreover, it is imperative for the state to uphold the rule of law and ensure that any restrictions imposed on these freedoms are reasonable, proportionate, and consistent with constitutional principles.