Madras HC unblocks Vikatan site

Madras high court grants relief to Vikatan magazine: A key development in preserving press freedom

The interim order of the Madras HC in the case ‘Ananda Vikatan Productions Pvt. Ltd. And Others v. Union of India’ have brought attention to the critical importance of safeguarding journalistic freedom in India. The case involves Ananda Vikatan Productions Pvt. Ltd. (Vikatan), a prominent Tamil weekly publication, whose entire website was blocked pursuant to an order of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The central government cited a cartoon published on the site—depicting the Indian Prime Minister and the then-President of the United States—as a threat to India’s sovereignty and foreign relations.

Freedom of speech and its nexus with the press freedom

Freedom of speech is integral to any democratic setup, often described as the very cornerstone that supports all other liberties. In India, Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution explicitly protects every citizen’s right to free speech and expression—an umbrella under which press freedom thrives. The press itself is commonly recognized as the “fourth pillar of democracy,” reflecting its mission to remain independent of the executive, legislature, and judiciary.

In the United States, the landmark “Pentagon Papers” decision (New York Times v. Sullivan) underscored that the press must do more than merely transmit information between government officials and the public: it should operate as a neutral institution, shining a light on governmental functions and exposing any shortcomings. Although the Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention the freedom of the press by name, the Supreme Court has long affirmed in cases like Sakal Papers v. Union of India that freedom of speech and expression is a broad genus, of which press freedom is a vital species. Open discourse, critiques, and reporting on the functioning of government serve the public interest—so whenever laws or administrative measures threaten to muzzle the press, courts bear the responsibility to strike them down and uphold the Constitution.

The blocking of Vikatan’s website

Government’s action
On 25.02.2025, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued an order blocking the entire website of Vikatan. Officials argued that a caricature published by the magazine undermined India’s friendly relations with a foreign state, thus justifying the action under Section 69A of the IT Act and the “reasonable restrictions” outlined in Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
Vikatan’s response
Vikatan challenged the blanket ban as excessive. They maintained that political satire and commentary lie at the heart of a free press. Shutting down an entire website over a single image, they argued, was disproportionate and infringed upon both their editorial independence and the readers’ right to information.

The Madras high court’s interim order

On 06.03.2025, Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy granted partial relief:

Limited removal of content: The Court held that blocking the entire domain was unnecessary. It directed the publishers to temporarily remove only the specific cartoon in question.
Unblocking the site: Once the offending material was taken down, the Union of India was to promptly restore access to the rest of the website.
Further hearing: The Court set a date two weeks later for the central government to file its counter-affidavit, at which time it would scrutinize whether the caricature truly warranted any continued restriction.

This approach aligns with the principle of proportionality, a concept clarified by the Supreme Court in various judgments, including Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. Courts have insisted that restrictions on speech must be the least intrusive possible—removing only the offending material, rather than imposing an overbroad restriction affecting legitimate content or expression.

The order in the case Ananda Vikatan Productions Pvt. Ltd. And Others v. Union of India (WP 7944 of 2025) Delivered by Madras HC Bharatha Chakravarthy J on March 6, 2025 may be read here:

Download PDF

By granting Vikatan temporary relief and restricting the blocking order to only the particular caricature, the Madras High Court has made an important statement about press freedom in the digital era. This nuanced approach promotes a healthy environment for political satire and commentary, without dismissing national security or foreign-policy concerns. As India continues to rely on digital platforms for information and debate, the balance struck in cases like Vikatan serves as a reminder that freedom of speech particularly the freedom of the press remains the lifeblood of any vibrant democracy.