A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and A M Khanwilkar said that it will have to see whether the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression will be governed under reasonable restriction of decency or morality or other preferred fundamental rights will also have impact on it.
"Both Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) are preferred rights.
It said, "The core issue, as is projected before us, is whether the right conferred under Article 19(1)(a) is to be controlled singularly by the language employed under Article 19(2) or also the other fundamental right, that is right under Article 21 would have any impact on it."
The bench, while giving an example, said that if a minister or government servant like a DGP in exercise of freedom of speech and expression makes a statement that alleged incident of rape is false or an outcome of political controversy then can he be held accountable.
The court was hearing a plea filed by a man whose wife and daughter were gangraped in July last on a highway near Bulandshahr, seeking transfer of the case to Delhi, besides lodging of an FIR against former Uttar Pradesh minister Azam Khan for terming the alleged incident as an outcome of political controversy.
The apex court had earlier said it would deliberate upon the questions framed by it on the freedom of speech and expression and probable impact of statements of those holding high offices on free and fair probe in heinous cases including rape and molestation.
not absolute and there are reasonable restrictions provided. No criminal prosecution can be launched on the ground of decency or morality as these are not defined under any law."
The apex court said that it has to see whether a statement by a person in authority affects the right of rape victim under Article 21.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, who was present in the court, expressed his intention to assist the court and said that reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) "may be the only controlling provision but the right of freedom of speech and expression as enshrined and spelt out under Article 19(1)(a), has its own inherent contours and it is not boundless".
The bench posted the matter for final hearing to April 20 and asked the parties to address on the issue.
The former Uttar Pradesh minister had on December 15, last tendered an "unconditional apology" in connection with his alleged remark in the sensational Bulandshahr gangrape case which the apex court had accepted.
The apex court had on August 29 last year taken note of the alleged controversial remarks of Khan that the gangrape case was a "political conspiracy".
On November 17, the apex court had directed Khan to tender an "unconditional apology" for his alleged remarks in the matter while seeking assistance of the attorney general in dealing with the issue of statements made by persons holding public office in such cases.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
