Anuradha Basin v/s Union Of India: An Analysis based on Natural Law

 Anuradha Basin v/s Union Of India: An Analysis based on Natural Law

By Nemi Bhavsar

Natural law is often depicted as an abstract structure suspended in the heavens, of which positive law is merely a doppelganger. Man's law of self-preservation or an operative law of nature constraining man to a certain course of conduct has been envisioned as the natural law. Article 19 of India's constitution grants certain human rights. Article 19(1) states the freedom of speech and expression.[1] India, is the world's most populous country and has the world's largest democracy. It has a broad need to safeguard the freedom of speech and expression. After a major element of American jurisprudence, the right is taken from English law. Article 19(1)(g)provides rights to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Under Section 144 of The Code Criminal Procedure, Any executive magistrate empowered by the state has power to issue orders in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.

In the case of Anuradha Basin Vs Union Of India writs were filed due to the violation of these fundamental rights after the suspension of internet services in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian Supreme Court ruled that an arbitrary closure of internet access would be unconstitutional under Indian law, and that directives to close down the internet would pass the requirement and proportionality checks. The case concerned internet and travel restrictions levied on August 4, 2019 in India's Jammu and Kashmir area in the name of maintaining public order.

Facts Of The Case / Background

Jammu and Kashmir are Indian territories which border Pakistan, subjecting the two nations to a decades-long dispute. Under Article 370[16] of the Indian Constitution, The region had a special status and was not permitted to buy land or property under its own Constitution and the Indian people of other States of the nation.

The matter begins with a Civil Secretariat, Home Department, Jammu Government and Kashmir security advisory announcing that the stay will be shortened and their safe arrangements made. In the meantime, schools and workplaces were also shut down before further directives were received. Up until further orders, internet services, telephone connectivity and the flag were shut down.

The President of India was issued the Constitutional Order No. 272 extending to Jammu and Kashmir all terms of the Indian Constitution, excluding it from separate status that had been in force since 1954. On the same day the District Magistrate passed an order limiting the movement and public meetings, and apprehending violations of harmony and tranquilly due to the prevailing conditions under Section 144 of CrPC.

Issues:

• Government's action of prohibiting internet access was violating freedom of speech and expression as a natural law or not.

• Is the freedom to press and access to the internet equivalent as natural law or not.

The fundamental right of freedom to Press under freedom to speech and expression - Article 19(1)(a) is not specifically mentioned in the article of the constitution. Dr. Ambedkar, Chairman of the Drafting Committee, clarified in the Constituent Assembly debates, that no particular attention to press freedom was required because the press and an individual or a resident are identical as regards their right to express themselves.

In the Article 19(1)(a) [36]of Indian Constitution, the fathers viewed press freedom as an integral aspect of freedom of expression. In the case of Romesh Thapar Vs State of Madras and Brij Bhushan vs State of Delhi,