Jurisence
Home AI Legal Hub Advocacy Lab Study Skills About Podcast Academy soon Opportunities soon

LANDMARK CASE

Sakal Papers v. Union of India

AIR 1962 SC 305 · Supreme Court of India · Constitutional law

At a glance

  • Citation: AIR 1962 SC 305
  • Court: Supreme Court of India
  • Area of law: Constitutional law
  • In one line: Yes. It restricted circulation and therefore free speech, and was struck down.

1 Facts

A law regulated the number of pages a newspaper could print based on price.

2 Issue

Does regulating pages and prices violate press freedom?

3 What the court decided

Yes. It restricted circulation and therefore free speech, and was struck down.

4 Why it matters

A key press freedom case.

5 Think about it

Why is economic regulation of the press treated with suspicion?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

How to analyse a judgmentHow to cite this case

7 More cases on Constitutional law

  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 27
  • ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
  • Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981) 4 SCC 335
  • Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981) 1 SCC 722
  • Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) 3 SCC 1
  • Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Sajjan Singh v. State of RajasthanSalem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.

Jurisence

The Algorithm for Next-Gen Legal Minds

Explore

Home AI Legal Hub Advocacy Lab Study Materials Word of the Day Case of the Day Weekly Quiz My Jurisence Podcast Skill Roadmaps About

Legal

Privacy Policy Terms of Service Disclaimer

Connect

Contact Instagram Threads Facebook LinkedIn

© Jurisence. All rights reserved.

Educational content only — not legal advice.