Report No. 46
30. Apprehension about possible invocation of other parts of Article 19(1) considered.-
Before we part with this topic, we ought to refer to one consideration which we have carefully weighed in making our recommendation about the inclusion of Article 19(1)(f) and (g) and not the whole of Article 19(1). It is not unlikely that the Government might have thought of including the whole of Article 19(1) because of their apprehension that even the freedom of speech, for instance, might in future be successfully invoked in challenging the validity of laws implementing the Directive Principles enshrined in Article 39(b) and (c).
This apprehension of the Government would, no doubt, be referable to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sakal Papers1 case in which the freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) has been unduly and unreasonably extended to strike down the provisions of what Parliament regarded as a legitimate and progressive measure. We hope that the apprehension entertained by the Government may not come true. However, if in future, our hope is belied and the apprehension of the Government comes true, there will be time enough for Parliament to take suitable action by including any other part of Article 19(1).
1. Sakal Papers (Private) Ltd. v. Union of India, (1962) 3 SCR 842.