The Press Council of India is a statutory body that governs print and broadcast media in India to ensure freedom of speech. It was established in 1966 and can warn or censure journalists for ethics violations. It has 28 members including editors, journalists, management, and nominees from Parliament and fields like education. The Council handles complaints against and by the press, investigates issues like press freedom and media standards, and can direct authorities to ensure journalists' security. In one case, it recommended police protect a journalist receiving threats after publishing critical reports until the related criminal case was resolved.

1. BY
Rudranil
Sengupta
PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

2. Knowing Press Council In Brief

3. What Is Press Council
 The Press Council Of India is a statutory body in
India that governs the conduct of the print and
broadcast media. It is one of the most important
bodies that sustain democracy, as it has supreme
power in regards to the media to ensure that freedom
of speech is maintained. However, it is also
empowered to hold hearings on receipt of complaints
and take suitable action where appropriate. It may
either warn or censure the errant journalists on finding
them guilty.
For Example--- It did so on 21 July, 2006, when it
censured three newspapers — Times of India.Punjab
Kesri and Mid Day for violation of norms of journalistic
conduct.
The press council of India is protected by the
constitution and its actions may not be questioned
unless it is proved to be in violation of the constitution,
which makes it exceedingly powerful a body.

4. ORIGIN
 Sweden is the first country to form Press Council -
1916.It was called the Court of Law
 At present there are about 40 countries that have their
own Press Council.
 In all countries except Italy and Holland ,Press
Councils have been voluntarily set up
 The Functions and Powers of Press Councils of
various countries are found to differ.
 In USA ,guidelines of the Press Council are made in
consultation with the legal experts.
 In UK,The Press Council is formed by journalists ,
academicians etc.It is not a statutory body and has no
legal power

5. Powers, Practice and
Procedure
 The Press Council of India was first set up in
the year 1966 by the Parliament on the
recommendations of the First Press
Commission with the object of preserving
the freedom of the press and of maintaining
and improving the standards of press in
India. The present Council functions under
the Press Council Act 1978. It is a statutory,
quasi judicial body which acts as a watchdog
of the press. It adjudicates the complaints
against and by the press for violation of
ethics and for violation of the freedom of the
press respectively.

6. The Press Council is headed by a Chairman, who has,
by convention, been a retired judge of the Supreme
Court of India. The Council consists of 28 other
members of whom 20 represent the press and are
nominated by the press organisations/news agencies
recognised and notified by the Council as all India
bodies of categories such as editors, working journalists
and owners and managers of newspaper; 5 members
are nominated from the two houses of Parliament and 3
represent cultural, literary and legal fields as nominees
of the Sahitya Academy, University Grants Commission
and the Bar Council of India. The members serve on the
Council for a term of three years. The Council was last
reconstituted on May 22, 2001. The present Chairman is
Ganendra Narayan Ray.
 The Council is funded by revenue collected by it as fees
levied on the registered newspapers in the country on
the basis of their circulation. No fee is levied on
newspapers with a circulation of less than 5000 copies.

7. THE FRAMEWORK
 Term -3 yrs
 Constitution of the Press Council –
 Total members -28
 Chairman -01.The chairman is always a retired judge of the Supreme Court. He
is nominated by a committee consisting of the chairman of Rajya
Sabha,Speaker of Lok Sabha,and one elected representative of council
member.
 Among the 28 members –
 a.Working Journalists (6 editors of newspapers,7 working journalists other than
editors) -
: 13
 b. From Management , big , medium and small newspapers
: 06
 c.News Agencies
:01
 d.Members of Parliament nominated by speaker of Lok Sabha
:05
 (3 from Lok sabha and 2 from Rajya Sabha)
 e.Persons having special knowledge or practical experience in the following
fields
 a.Education and Science(nominated by UGC)
:01

8. Press Council Act 1978
An act to establish a
council for the purpose of
preserving the freedom of
The Press and maintaining
and improving the
standards of newspapers
and news agencies in

9. FUNCTIONS
The Council may in furtherance of its objects ,
perform the following functions namely –
 To help newspapers and news agencies to maintain their
independence
 To build up a code of conduct for newspapers ,news agencies
and journalists in accordance with high professional standards.
 to ensure on the part of the newspapers ,news agencies and
journalists,the maintainance of high standards of public taste and
foster a due sense of both rights and responsibilities of
citizenship.
 To encourage the growth of the sense of responsibility and public
service among all those engaged in the profession of journalism
 To keep under review any development likely to restrict the
supply and dessimination of news of public intrest and
importance.
 To keep under review cases of assistance received by any
newspaper or news agency in India from any foreign source
including such cases as by an individual , association , of
persons or other organization

10.  To undertake studies of foreign newspapers ,including those
brought out by any embassy or other representative in India of
foreign state , their circulation and impact.
 To promote a proper functional relationship among all classes of
persons engaged in the production or publication of newspapers
or in news agencies.
 To concern itself with the developments such as concentration of
or other aspects of ownership of newspapers and news agencies
which may affect the independence of the Press and
 To understand such studies as may be entrusted to the Council
and to express its opinion in regard to any matter referred to it
by the Central Government.

11. Cases Handled
Last one year :
 Complaints received -8939 (out of which 6246 were
against the press)
 Major Complaints against the press–
 P ublication of unverified and abusive language
 Printing of obscene pictures
 Communal and Casteist writings
 Attempts to inflame communal passion
 Refusal to publish replies
 Encroachment on privacy
 Distorted and Prejudiced reporting
 Suppression of facts
 Sensationl and misleading headings
 Malicious reporting and writing

12. CASE STUDIES
Case 1
S.No. F.No.13/114/04-05-PCI.
Shri Ramji Prasad Gupta,
Editor/Publisher,
Gorakhpur Mail,
Gorakhpur (U.P.).
Versus
1.The Chief Secretary,
Government of U.P.,
Lucknow.
2 The Secretary,
Home (Police) Department,
Government of U.P.,
Lucknow.
3 The Superintendent of Police,
Gorakhpur (U.P.).

13. Complaint
This complaint dated 25.11.2004 has been filed by Shri
Ramji Prasad Gupta, Editor/Publisher, Gorakhpur Mail,
Gorakhpur (U.P.) against Shri P.K. Singh, Station House
Officer, Police Station Dharamshala Bazar, Gorakhpur
(U.P.) for alleged threats due to the publication of critical
news items against the local police, highlighting their
irregularities and inefficiency. The respondent also filed
false cases and threatened him and his family, added the
complainant. He alleged that due to the atrocities of the
respondent, he could not perform his duty efficiently.
Comments of the State Government of U.P. through Chief
Secretary; Secretary Home (Police) Department; and
Superintendent of Police, Gorakhpur were invited on
9.2.2005.

14. Counter comments
The complainant vide his letter dated 25.4.2005
informed the Council that he was being threatened by
the local police and sought the transfer of the SHO,
Dharmshala Bazar, Gorakhpur.
Appearance before the Inquiry Committee
The matter was called out for hearing before the
Inquiry Committee at New Delhi on 28.4.2005. Shri
Jawahar Lal Nigam appeared for the complainant while
Shri Durga Dutt Singh, represented the respondent
police authorities.

15. Proceedings before the Inquiry Committee
The representative of the complainant stated that due to publication
of critical news reports against the police, the police was harassing the
complainant. He was being pressurised to withdraw the complaint. He
was also getting threats that he would be entangled in false cases. Due
to this, he added that the complainant was unable to perform his
journalistic duties.
Shri Durga Dutt appearing for the respondent authorities denied the
allegations of the complainant. He pleaded that on 16.11.2004 a minor
girl was abducted and raped. The accused was complainant’s son.
Medical examination was done. The case was pending in the court. In
this regard the complainant published a news report just to defame the
family of the girl. They filed a case and the police was not favouring any
party to that case.
The complainant’s representative countering the statement of the
respondent stated that the girl as abducted on 16.11.2004 but the FIR
was registered only on 1.12.2004. All the witnesses in the case were of
police. The news was published after proper investigation and the case
was registered after publication of the critical reports against the police.

16. Recommendations of the Inquiry Committee
The Inquiry Committee considered the material on record and the
oral submissions of the parties. The Committee noted that the issue
relating to abduction of a girl and her rape and the involvement of
complainant’s son therein was sub-judice. The Committee was therefore,
not competent to go into the issue. However, it noted that the
complainant had submitted that after the publication of critical news
against the police he was getting constant threats and he apprehended
danger to his and his family’s life. The Committee, observed that
complainant’s discharge of his journalistic function was in no way related
to the criminal case. Therefore, the Committee recommended to the
Council to direct the police authorities to ensure security of the
complainant to enable him to perform his journalistic duties freely and
fearlessly. The Council may be informed of the steps taken by the
Government to this end with three weeks of the receipt of the
adjudication.
Decision of the Council
The Press Council, on consideration of the records of the case and
report of the Inquiry Committee accepts the reasons, findings and the
recommendation of the Committee and decides accordingly.

17. CASE 2
Press Council of India pulls up four publications
For publishing unethical and irresponsible write-ups
 NEW DELHI: Four publications have been pulled up
by the Press Council of India (PCI) for publishing
"unethical and irresponsible write-ups without
verifying the facts and for violation of the norms of
journalistic conduct."
 While Dainik Bhaskar (Gurgaon) and the Agra-
based Hindi weekly Rozgar Sangrah were "warned"
by the PCI, Times of India (Hyderabad) and the
Kannada monthly Mathukathe were admonished. In
the case of the Times of India, the Council
admonished it for publishing a baseless report.

18.  A similar observation was made in the case of Dainik
Bhaskar for publishing a "false, malicious, mischievous and
defamatory news report with the motive of defaming and
degrading the reputation of the Government Women's
College, Gurgaon, its principal and staff".
 Taking a grim view of the fact that the paper did not publish
the clarification of the complainant, the Council directed the
respondent editor to publish the clarification without any
counter allegations. Mathukathe was admonished for
violating journalistic ethics by publishing libellous material
aimed at denigrating the complainant, Paul G.D. Cunha, by
using foul language.
 According to the Council, the magazine editor not only failed
to exercise his editorial discretion by cutting out and editing
the libellous statement but also did not observe the statutory
norms of journalistic conduct on pre-publication verification.
 Rozgar Sangrah was found guilty of publishing an
unauthorised advertisement on appointment of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Uttar Pradesh Bhoomi