PolityGovernance
News 0 of 23

SC Bench Affirms Fraternity as Constitutional Dharma, Bars Vilification of Communities Under Article 19(1)(a)

PolityHIGH
Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims MediumMains HighStatic GK Link
25 Feb 2026
~2 min
Source: Indian Express
Key Data:Article 19(1)(a)February 19, 2026
Bodies:Supreme CourtCBFC
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, in a separate order, stated that vilifying any community is constitutionally impermissible for both state and non-state actors.

2.The judgment emphasizes that fraternity, a constitutional objective, is paramount and that freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) is subject to reasonable restrictions.

3.The Court reiterated that once a film is cleared by the CBFC, its screening cannot be prohibited on law and order grounds; it is the state's duty to ensure public order.

The Big Picture
Prelims · MediumMains · High

The Supreme Court has ruled that vilifying any community is constitutionally impermissible, linking it to the Preamble's objective of fraternity. This clarifies the limits of free speech under Article 19(1)(a) and reinforces the state's duty to maintain law and order post-CBFC clearance.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Constitutional ArticleArticle 19(1)(a)
Judicial BenchJustices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan
Case ContextFilm title 'Ghooskhor Pandit'
Date of OrderFebruary 19, 2026

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Constitutional Article: Article 19(1)(a)
  • ›Judicial Bench: Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Article 19(1)(a) and its reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
  • ›Target this Constitutional Concept: Fraternity as mentioned in the Preamble.

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Under which Ministry does the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) function?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the observations made by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court:

1. It is constitutionally permissible for non-state actors to criticize any community through speeches.

2. Fraternity, as mentioned in the Preamble, is a vital instrument for realizing equality in the Indian constitutional context.

3. Once a film is granted a certificate by the CBFC, the producer has no right to exhibit it if there is a potential law and order situation.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan disposed of the petition related to the film 'Ghooskhor Pandit' on which date?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What is the primary constitutional rationale cited by Justice Bhuyan for prohibiting the vilification of communities?

All 25 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

SC Revises Interim Stay, Preserves Allahabad HC Quashing of NSA Detention Under Article 21

The Supreme Court revised its September 23 interim order, restricting the stay to only certain strictures and costs against the Noida DM, thereby preserving the Allahabad High Court's landmark quashing of a DU student's NSA detention. The case also raises serious questions about the SC's roster system and 'out-of-turn' listing, making it a critical study point for judicial review, preventive detention safeguards, and constitutional procedures.

Polity Current Affairs

Patna HC Rules Religious Freedom Under Article 25 Subject to Public Order and Morality

Patna High Court holds that the right to profess and practise religion under Article 25 is not absolute and can be restricted for public order, morality, and health. This reiterates the essential religious practices doctrine and clarifies that constitutional protection does not extend to every mode of exercise. A plea for 300 devotees in a religious procession in Siwan, Bihar, was dismissed citing past law-and-order incidents.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Quashes NEET Protest FIRs Under Article 142, Orders Compensation Policy for Suicide Victims

Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash all FIRs registered against NEET protesters across India, while ordering compensation policy for families of students who died by suicide. This judgment underscores the balance between protest rights and criminal liability, and the government's commitment to address exam leak issues.

Polity Current Affairs

EC Decision-Making Under Scrutiny: Article 324, CEC Act 2023, Dissent Notes Explained

The Election Commission's internal dissent has come under the spotlight after two Election Commissioners recorded objections 14 times in 10 months. This raises critical questions about the functioning of a constitutional body, the balance between unanimity and majority decision-making, and the protection of dissenting voices — a core area for UPSC and State PSC exams.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules NCSC Cannot Issue Binding Directions Under Article 338

The Supreme Court clarified that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has only recommendatory and advisory powers under Article 338, not adjudicatory powers. It cannot issue binding orders in service disputes. This ruling sets boundaries for constitutional commissions under Articles 338, 338A, and 338B.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Recognises Student Mental Health Under Article 21 in Sukdeb Saha (2025); NEET Paper Leak Tests Institutional Responsibility

The Supreme Court has expanded the right to life (Article 21) to include student mental health, holding institutions responsible for student suicides under Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025). The NEET paper leak of 2026 becomes the first major test of this new constitutional principle, forcing the state to move beyond individual controversies toward structural reform in examinations and recruitment.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Upholds Clinical Establishments Rules 2012: Price Range Fixing Under Article 47

The Union Health Ministry defended the constitutional validity of the 2012 Clinical Establishments Rules before the Supreme Court, arguing that price regulation of healthcare services is essential to fulfill the mandate of Article 47 (DPSP). This is a key case for understanding the balance between fundamental rights (Article 19(1)(g)) and reasonable restrictions in the interest of public health.

Polity Current Affairs

SC in Vihaan Kumar Reinforces Arrest Safeguards: Informing Grounds Mandatory Under Article 22(1), BNSS 2023

SC in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025) held that every arrested person must be directly and meaningfully informed of the grounds of arrest, and failure violates Article 22(1) and Section 50 CrPC (Section 47 BNSS). The verdict also links an unconstitutional arrest to illegal subsequent remand and reiterates Article 21 dignity. For exams, remember the case, the CrPC-to-BNSS section mapping, and the Arnesh Kumar arrest guidelines.