What was the key question in Sakal Papers?

Whether publishing and circulating a newspaper are protected by the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Did the Court recognise freedom of the press?

Yes. Though not named separately, freedom of the press is part of Article 19(1)(a) and can only be limited on Article 19(2) grounds.

What were the impugned measures?

The 1956 Act and the 1960 Order that tied the number of pages to price and limited advertisement space and supplements.

How did these measures affect speech?

They controlled circulation and content space, directly curbing the ability to publish and disseminate ideas.

What did the Supreme Court finally hold?

The Act and the Order were unconstitutional as they violated Article 19(1)(a); the petitioners’ challenge succeeded.

Is newspaper business only Article 19(1)(g)?

No. While running a newspaper is also a business, speech protection under Article 19(1)(a) remains the primary shield.

Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India

AIR 1962 SC 305 • Freedom of Press • Article 19(1)(a) & 19(2) • Price–Page Rules • Circulation Limits

Supreme Court of India 1962 Citation: AIR 1962 SC 305 ~6 min India

Author: Gulzar Hashmi • Published: 24 Oct 2025

PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Sakal Papers v. Union of India; Article 19(1)(a); freedom of press; circulation SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: Article 19(2); price–page schedule; advertisements; supplements; newspapers

Quick Summary

A Marathi daily, Sakal, challenged Central rules that fixed the number of pages by price and limited advertisement space and supplements. The Supreme Court held that publishing and circulating a newspaper fall inside Article 19(1)(a). The impugned Act and Order directly cut the paper’s space and reach, so they violated free speech. The measures were struck down.

Press freedom is part of Article 19(1)(a).
Price–page & ad caps burden speech and circulation.
Act 1956 and Order 1960—unconstitutional.

Issues

Do publishing and circulation come under Article 19(1)(a)?
Were the price–page rules and ad limits valid under Article 19(2)?

Rules

Freedom of Press: Included within Article 19(1)(a) even if not named separately.
Reasonable Limits: Only those in Article 19(2) (security, public order, etc.). Economic controls that choke speech are invalid.
Propagation: The right to speak includes the right to publish, disseminate, and circulate ideas.

Facts (Timeline)

View Timeline

Sakal daily: 6 pages on five days, 4 pages on one day (price: 7 np); Sunday: 10 pages (price: 12 np). ~40% ads, rest news & views.

1952: Press Commission set up; gave recommendations on the press.

1956: Act linked page count and size to price; controlled ad space.

1960: Order capped maximum pages for a given price and regulated supplements.

Sakal, its shareholders, and two readers filed writs challenging the Act and the Order.

Timeline visual for the Sakal Papers case — Visual timeline (optional learning aid).

Arguments

Union of India

Price–page rule ensures fair competition and healthy press growth.
Ad space limits avoid dominance by larger papers.
Measures are regulatory economics, not speech control.

Sakal & Readers

Publishing and circulation are core speech activities.
Rules directly shrink pages and reach, hurting speech and revenue that funds news.
Not saved by Article 19(2); they are content-impacting controls.

Judgment

View Visual

Freedom to publish and circulate is protected by Article 19(1)(a).
Price–page and ad limits hit speech directly; not justified by Article 19(2).
Act 1956 and Order 1960 declared unconstitutional.

Judgment overview graphic for Sakal Papers case

Ratio (Core Principle)

Any law that directly curbs a newspaper’s space or circulation restrains speech under Article 19(1)(a). Such limits must fit Article 19(2). Purely economic caps that choke dissemination are invalid.

Why It Matters

Confirms press freedom within Article 19(1)(a).
Draws a line between economic regulation and speech restriction.
Protects circulation, page count, and ad-supported news.

Key Takeaways

Speech Over Business: Newspapers are speech first, business second.
Circulation Is Speech: Limits on reach = limits on speech.
Ad Space Matters: Ads fund news; capping them can curb content.

19(2) Is Exhaustive: Non-19(2) aims cannot justify speech cuts.
Exam Tip: Map Effect on speech → 19(2) test → Unconstitutional.
Result: Act & Order struck down.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: SAKAL = Speech Against Kapping Ads & Leaves (pages/leaves)

Speech: Publishing + circulation = Article 19(1)(a).
Kapping Ads: Ad caps hurt content funding.
Leaves (Pages): Page caps curb dissemination → invalid.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Are page–price and ad limits consistent with Article 19(1)(a) read with Article 19(2)?

Rule

Press freedom under 19(1)(a); only 19(2) grounds can justify restrictions.

Application

The rules shrink space and reach; they directly burden speech, not merely regulate business.

Conclusion

Measures fail 19(2); Act and Order struck down as unconstitutional.

Glossary

Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression—includes press freedom.
Article 19(2): Permissible limits (security, public order, etc.). A closed list.
Price–Page Rule: Linking cost to page count; restricts space and reach.
Circulation: How many copies/people a paper reaches—part of dissemination.

FAQs

Not as a separate head, but it is fully protected under Article 19(1)(a).

They directly reduced pages and circulation, which curbs speech, and did not fit any ground in Article 19(2).

Yes. Ad revenue funds news pages; strict ad caps can reduce content and reach.

No. It is a business under Article 19(1)(g) but, above all, a speech activity under Article 19(1)(a).

Quick Nav

Summary Issues Rules Facts Arguments Judgment Ratio Why It Matters Takeaways Mnemonic IRAC Glossary FAQs Related