Jump to content

Censorship in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Censorship in India involves the restriction, suppression, or regulation of speech, public communication, and information by the government, regulatory bodies, and occasionally non-state actors. Although the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a), this right is not absolute. Article 19(2) allows the state to impose "reasonable restrictions" in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency, morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence.[1]

Historically, censorship in India has taken various forms, ranging from the strict pre-publication press censorship imposed during The Emergency (1975–1977) to the banning of books and films that are deemed offensive to religious sensibilities or political establishments. In the 21st century, digital censorship has expanded considerably. The government has utilised the Information Technology Act, 2000, and subsequent amendments—such as the IT Rules of 2021 and 2026—to block websites, regulate over-the-top (OTT) media services, mandate content removal by social media intermediaries, and curb synthetically generated information (deepfakes). Additionally, according to digital rights organisations, India has consistently recorded the highest number of state-ordered internet shutdowns in the world.[2]

The country's press and civil liberties environment has faced international criticism for a perceived deterioration in recent years. In its 2026 report, the advocacy group Freedom House classified India as "Partly Free," with an overall global freedom score of 62 out of 100, citing increased harassment of journalists, non-governmental organisations, and critics.[3] Similarly, the 2026 World Press Freedom Index, published by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), ranked India 157th out of 180 countries, classifying the press freedom situation as "very serious."[4]

Historical background

[edit]

Censorship in India has roots in the British colonial era. The British Raj enacted several laws to stifle nationalist dissent and control the domestic press, most notably the Vernacular Press Act of 1878, which aimed to restrict publications in Indian languages. Other colonial-era legislation, such as the Official Secrets Act 1923 and the sedition clause under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, were frequently used to prosecute independence activists like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.[5]

Following independence in 1947, the newly framed Constitution of India guaranteed freedom of speech. However, in response to early public order challenges and legal interpretations by the judiciary, the government of Jawaharlal Nehru passed the First Amendment to the Constitution in 1951. This amendment formally introduced the provision for "reasonable restrictions" on free expression, setting the precedent for modern Indian censorship law.[6]

[edit]

Article 19 and reasonable restrictions

[edit]

Freedom of speech is guaranteed to all Indian citizens under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. However, the First Amendment to the Constitution in 1951 introduced Article 19(2), which empowers the state to enact laws imposing "reasonable restrictions" on this freedom. These restrictions are frequently invoked by both central and state governments to justify the censorship of media, literature, and digital communications in order to maintain public order and communal harmony in a highly diverse nation.[7]

Security and public order laws

[edit]

Several penal and security laws function as de facto mechanisms for censorship. The Official Secrets Act 1923 is a colonial-era law utilised to protect classified government information and has been used to prosecute whistleblowers and journalists reporting on national security or defence.[8] The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), India's primary counter-terrorism legislation, has been increasingly applied against journalists, activists, and academics for producing literature or journalism that the state deems sympathetic to insurgent or anti-national movements.[9] Furthermore, Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalises sedition, has historically been a tool to suppress political dissent, although its application has faced intense scrutiny from the Supreme Court of India.

Religious sentiments and obscenity

[edit]

Given India's complex history of communal violence, laws protecting religious sentiments are strictly enforced. Section 295A of the IPC criminalises deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class. This law is the primary legal instrument used by religious groups to demand the banning of books, films, and artwork, often leading to publishers and artists self-censoring to avoid protracted legal battles or mob violence.[10]

Obscenity is governed by Section 292 of the IPC, which prohibits the sale, distribution, and exhibition of obscene materials. While watching or possessing pornographic materials is generally legal in private, its distribution is strictly banned.[11]

Information technology and internet

[edit]

Digital censorship has expanded considerably since the enactment of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000. Under Section 69A of the IT Act, the government possesses the power to issue directives to internet service providers (ISPs) and technology companies to block public access to any information that threatens the sovereignty, integrity, or defence of the country.

Internet shutdowns

[edit]

According to the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) and international digital rights groups, India consistently ranks as the global leader in state-ordered internet shutdowns. According to the SFLC, India has seen hundreds of internet blackouts over the last decade, primarily implemented by state governments to quell protests, prevent communal violence, or even stop cheating during civil service examinations.[12]

Historically, shutdowns were ordered under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), an emergency provision to maintain public order. The most extensive shutdown occurred in Jammu and Kashmir, where the internet was suspended for 213 days between August 2019 and January 2020 following the abrogation of the region's special autonomous status. In 2023, the state of Manipur experienced a 208-day internet shutdown amidst violent ethnic clashes, severely hampering journalism and emergency response efforts in the region.[2]

Content blocking and app bans

[edit]

The Indian government has frequently directed social media platforms, including Twitter (now X), Facebook, and YouTube, to remove accounts and content critical of government policies, particularly during periods of civil unrest such as the 2020–2021 Indian farmers' protest.[13]

Geopolitics has also driven digital censorship. Following the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) banned hundreds of Chinese applications, most notably the video-sharing app TikTok and the mobile version of PUBG, citing national security and data privacy concerns.[14]

Intermediary guidelines and Fact Check Units

[edit]

The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, introduced in 2021 and heavily amended in 2023 and 2026, expanded government regulatory powers over digital platforms. The rules mandate that social media intermediaries can lose their "safe harbour" protection—which previously shielded them from liability for user-generated content—if they fail to comply with government takedown orders within strict timeframes.

A highly controversial 2023 amendment permitted the creation of a government-run "Fact Check Unit" empowered to identify and mandate the removal of "fake, false, or misleading" news pertaining to the business of the central government. Critics and political satirists, arguing the rules would result in sweeping self-censorship, challenged the amendment in the Bombay High Court, which delivered a split verdict in early 2024. In March 2024, the Supreme Court of India intervened and placed a stay on the notification of the Fact Check Unit pending further constitutional review.[15][16]

Press freedom

[edit]

The Indian press operates in a complex environment where constitutional guarantees frequently clash with statutory constraints and political pressures. During The Emergency in 1975, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed absolute censorship on the press; in a famous act of defiance, the Bombay edition of The Times of India published an obituary on 26 June that read, "D.E.M O'Cracy beloved husband of T.Ruth, father of L.I.Bertie, brother of Faith, Hope and Justica expired."[17] The censorship was dismantled when emergency rule ended in March 1977.

In contemporary India, press freedom has experienced a sustained decline on international indices. The Reporters Without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index recorded a drop in India's rank from 140 in 2019 to 157 out of 180 countries in 2026. The RSF highlighted that journalists face judicial harassment, Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), and the application of anti-terror legislation for critical reporting.[4] Furthermore, organisations such as Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists have noted that the economic concentration of media ownership among a few corporate conglomerates closely aligned with political leadership has fostered a climate of institutional self-censorship, diluting independent investigative journalism.[18]

Censorship by medium

[edit]

Film and television

[edit]

Films in India require pre-exhibition clearance from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), a statutory body under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The CBFC categorises films into four distinct ratings: unrestricted public exhibition (U); unrestricted exhibition with parental guidance for children below 12 (U/A); restricted to adults (A); and restricted to specialised professions (S).[19]

Historically, the CBFC has mandated severe cuts or outright bans on films touching upon political controversies, communal violence, or sexuality. Gulzar's political drama Aandhi (1975) was banned during the Emergency because its protagonist bore a striking resemblance to Indira Gandhi. Shekhar Kapur’s biographical drama Bandit Queen (1994) faced extensive legal battles over its depiction of nudity and sexual violence before the Supreme Court permitted its release.[20] Similarly, Anurag Kashyap's Black Friday was delayed for three years out of fear it might prejudice the ongoing judicial trials regarding the 1993 Mumbai bombings.

While judicial interventions have historically forced the CBFC to adopt a more liberal stance—recognising that film has a high potential to cultivate thought and should not be arbitrarily restricted—filmmakers and critics note that political sensitivities continue to influence film clearance.[21] In 2024, the biographical film Satluj (originally titled Punjab '95), depicting the life of murdered human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra, was pulled from the streaming platform ZEE5 within two days of its release. Prior to its OTT launch, the film spent nearly three years in the CBFC pipeline, where the board demanded 127 cuts and multiple title changes.[22]

With the implementation of the IT Rules 2021, OTT streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video were brought under a self-regulatory grievance redressal framework, resulting in streaming services preemptively editing or dropping politically sensitive content to avoid violating government guidelines.[23]

[edit]

The censorship of literature in India is most frequently driven by the invocation of IPC Section 295A (outraging religious feelings). In 1988, under pressure from Muslim groups, India became the first country in the world to ban the import of Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses, a ban that was not technically challenged or resolved for decades.[24] Similar legal mechanics have been utilised by conservative Hindu groups to suppress academic literature. In 2014, under the threat of a lawsuit citing Section 295A, Penguin Books India controversially withdrew and destroyed copies of American Indologist Wendy Doniger's The Hindus: An Alternative History.[25] James Laine's scholarly work Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India was banned in Maharashtra in 2004 after the Sambhaji Brigade attacked the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, accusing the author of promoting offensive narratives about the Maratha king.[26]

Political and corporate interests have also successfully suppressed literature. The Polyester Prince, a 1998 biography of Indian business magnate Dhirubhai Ambani by Hamish McDonald, was never published in India after the Reliance conglomerate obtained a court injunction on the grounds of anticipatory defamation.[27] Historically, the import of Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong was restricted by the Indian government,[28] and several works by the exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin have been banned in West Bengal over allegations of promoting separatism and inciting religious unrest.

Theatre and visual arts

[edit]

Theatrical performances and the visual arts have frequently faced de facto bans through vandalism and protests from political outfits. In 1978, Kiran Nagarkar's play Bedtime Story, based partly on the Mahābhārata, faced extralegal bans and violent protests for 17 years led by conservative organizations such as the Shiv Sena, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and Hindu Mahasabha.[29]

In 1999, the Maharashtra government banned the Marathi play Me Nathuram Godse Boltoy (I, Nathuram Godse, Am Speaking), which presented the perspective of Mahatma Gandhi's assassin. The ban was later rescinded by the Bombay High Court, which ruled the government had exceeded its authority.[30] In the realm of visual arts, prominent modern painter M. F. Husain spent the final years of his life in self-imposed exile after facing death threats and a barrage of criminal lawsuits under obscenity and religious offence laws for his paintings depicting Hindu deities in the nude.[31]

Cartography

[edit]

In 1961, the Indian government enacted the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which criminalised questioning the territorial integrity or frontiers of India in a manner prejudicial to the safety and security of the state.[32] Consequently, the government requires that all maps published, imported, or circulated in India reflect its official territorial claims—most notably the entire region of Kashmir, parts of which are disputed by Pakistan and China. Foreign publications, magazines, and globes that do not conform to the Survey of India's official borders are frequently seized, censored, or blacked out by customs authorities.[33]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ↑ "The Constitution of India". Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
  2. 1 2 "India: Freedom on the Net 2024 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved 15 November 2024.
  3. ↑ "India: Freedom in the World 2026 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved 12 June 2026.
  4. 1 2 "Index 2026 – Global Score". Reporters Without Borders. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  5. ↑ Kaur, Raminder; Mazzarella, William (2009). Censorship in South Asia: Cultural Regulation from Sedition to Seduction. Indiana University Press. pp. 35–38. ISBN 978-0-253-22093-6.
  6. ↑ Guha, Ramachandra (2007). India After Gandhi: The History of the World's Largest Democracy. Macmillan. pp. 200–202. ISBN 978-0-330-39610-3.
  7. ↑ Austin, Granville (1999). Working a democratic constitution: the Indian experience. Oxford University Press. p. 295. ISBN 0-19-564888-9.
  8. ↑ "The Official Secrets Act, 1923". India Code. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  9. ↑ "India: Anti-terror laws frequently used to silence journalists". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  10. ↑ Kumar, Nishant (2023). Religious Offense and Censorship of Publications: An Enquiry through the Prism of Indian Laws and the Judiciary. New Delhi: Routledge India.
  11. ↑ Rajak, Brajesh (2011). Pornography Laws: XXX Must not be Tolerated (paperback ed.). Delhi: Universal Law Co. p. 61. ISBN 978-81-7534-999-5.
  12. ↑ "Internet Shutdown Report 2023-2024". Software Freedom Law Center, India (SFLC.in). 17 February 2025. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  13. ↑ "Twitter blocks accounts in India as farmers protest week of internet cuts". The Guardian. 1 February 2021. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  14. ↑ Foster, Christopher, ed. (2024). "China's Digital Expansion in the Global South: Systemic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda". China's Digital Expansion in the Global South. London: Routledge. p. 11. ISBN 978-1-032-94328-2.
  15. ↑ "Challenge to the IT Rules 2023". Supreme Court Observer. 21 March 2024. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  16. ↑ "FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS on The Information Technology Amendment Rules" (PDF). Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology. October 2025. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  17. ↑ Sorabjee, Soli J. (1977). The Emergency, Censorship, and the Press in India, 1975-77. Central News Agency.
  18. ↑ "Media Ownership Monitor India". Reporters Without Borders. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  19. ↑ "The Cinematograph Act, 1952" (PDF). Central Board of Film Certification. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  20. ↑ "From 'Aandhi' to 'Satluj': Before the Diljit Dosanjh starrer, these Bollywood and regional films faced bans, delays and severe legal and CBFC rows". The Times of India. 10 July 2024. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  21. ↑ "Censorship, that redundant pair of scissors". The Hindu. 12 June 2016. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 28 July 2026.
  22. ↑ "'Punjab 95' renamed 'Satluj', faces 127 cuts from CBFC". The Indian Express. 12 July 2024. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  23. ↑ "India issues sweeping new rules to regulate social media, streaming services". TechCrunch. 25 February 2021. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  24. ↑ "Rushdie 'hurt' by India ban". BBC News. 10 October 1998. Archived from the original on 14 December 2006. Retrieved 29 May 2006.
  25. ↑ "India: The Hindus: Wendy Doniger". TIME. 12 February 2014. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  26. ↑ Novetzke, Christian Lee (2004). "The Laine Controversy and the Study of Hinduism" (PDF). International Journal of Hindu Studies. 8 (1–3): 183–201. doi:10.1007/s11407-004-0008-9. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 December 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  27. ↑ Guha, Ramachandra (30 July 2011). "Ban the Ban: The republic of India bans books with a depressing frequency". The Telegraph. Calcutta. Archived from the original on 3 February 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  28. ↑ Chakrabarti, Sreemanti (2013). "Empty Symbol: The Little Red Book in India". In Cook, Alexander C. (ed.). Mao's Little Red Book: A Global History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 118, 127. ISBN 978-1-107-05722-7.
  29. ↑ Purandare, Vaibhav (2012). Sundarji, Padma Rao (ed.). Bal Thackeray and the rise of Shiv Sena. Mumbai, Maharashtra: Roli Books Private Limited. p. 288. ISBN 9788174369918. In 1977-78, the [Shiv Sena] party, along with the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha, extra-legally banned Bedtime Story, a play written by Kiran Nagarkar.
  30. ↑ "Gandhi play banned". BBC News. 18 July 1998. Archived from the original on 12 November 2010. Retrieved 28 April 2010.
  31. ↑ "India: The Hindus: Wendy Doniger". TIME. 12 February 2014. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  32. ↑ "The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961". Vakilno1.com. Archived from the original on 15 November 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
  33. ↑ Sanjoy Majumder (24 May 2011). "Economist accuses India of censorship over Kashmir map". BBC News. Retrieved 11 July 2026.
Further reading
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Censorship_in_India&oldid=1366505197"