Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 19(1)(a) and (19)2.

Freedom of Press Right of Press to publish autobiography of a condemned prisoner Extent of Whether prison officials can prevent publication of prisoner's autobiography to protect his right-Right of Press to criticise the acts and conduct of public officials-State whether can impose prior restraint to prevent publication of material defamatory of its officers.

Article 21-Right to privacy-Two important aspects of General law of privacy affording action in tort in case of invasion of privacy-Constitutional right as part of Article 21 providing protection against unlawful Government invasion Remedies to citizens in case of violation of right to privacy-Essential principles of right to privacy and exceptions to right stated.

Article 32-Writ filed in Supreme Court Disclosure by petitioner that writ was also filed in High Court for similar relief but no orders passed by High Court till the date of filing writ in this Court-Maintainability of writ.

The petitioners, Editors of a Tamil Weekly Magazine 'Nakkheeran' filed a writ petition in this Court seeking directions for (i) restraining the respondents-State and its officers - from interfering with the publication of the autobiography of a condemned prisoner, Auto Shankar and (ii) for restraining the Inspector General of Prison, Madras from taking the legal action as communicated by him in his letter dated 15th June, 1994. The petitioner's case was that, while in jail, the prisoner wrote his autoblography exposing nexus between prisoner and several officers of the State and with the knowledge and approval of the jail authorities, handed over the same to his wife for being delivered to his advocate with a request that It should be published in the petitioner's magazine; and that the prisoner also wrote several letters to his advocate and the petitioners in which he affirmed his aforesaid desire. Consequently, the petitioners, in their magazine issue dated 21st May, 1994 announced that soon they would be coming out with the sensational life history of Auto Shankar. Since the respondents were afraid that by the said publication, links of many officers with the condemned prisoner would be exposed, they not only forced the prisoner to write to the Inspector General of Prisons and to the petitioner requesting that his life story should not be published but also threatened the petitioners, by their communication dated 15th June, 1994, with legal action for black mailing. The petitioners also stated that before they filed a writ petition in this Court, they approached the Madras High Court for similar relief but no orders were passed by the High Court till the filing of the petition.

The respondents denied pressure on the prisoner and disputed the authenticity of the autobiography said to have been written by the prisoner as well as authority of the petitioners to publish the same. According to them no power of attorney was executed which has to be done in the presence of the prison officials under the Prison Rules - by the prisoner in favour of his advocate in connection with publication of the alleged book.. They further stated that on account of petitioner's failure to produce letter written by prisoner authorising them to publish autobiography, the High Court dismissed the petition. As the publication was likely to tarnish the Image of persons holding responsible positions in the public Institutions under the guise of autobiography they sent the communication dated 15th June, 1994 proposing to take legal action against the petitioners.

In view of the fact that in a writ petition under Article 32 this Court does not go into disputed questions of fact whether the petitioner has indeed written his autobiography and authorised the petitioners to publish the same this Court proceeded on the assumption that the condemned prisoner has neither written his autobiography nor has he authorised the petitioner to publish the same in their magazine and considered the following questions:-

(1) Whether a citizen of this country can prevent another person from writing his life-story or biography? Does such unauthorised writing infringe the citizen's right to privacy? Whether and in what circumstances the press is entitled to publish such unauthorised account of a citizen's life? What are the remedies open to a citizen in case of infringement of his right to privacy and in case such writing amounts to defamation?

(2) Whether the Government or public officials can impose prior restraint on the press to prevent publication of defamatory material?

(3) Whether the prison officials can prevent the publication of the life-story of a prisoner for protecting prisoner's right?

Allowing the petition, this Court.