N※N

Punjab newspapers delayed by police checks; opposition cries censorship attack

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. e-checks-opposition-cries-censorship-attack.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, November 2nd 2025 at 9:07 GMT by newsbytesapp.com
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-11-02 179 x 224 / 16553 Bytes

2025-11-02 224 x 224 / 14703 Bytes

2025-11-02 215 x 224 / 15222 Bytes

2025-11-02 233 x 216 / 14196 Bytes

Punjab Newspapers Delayed by Police Checks: Opposition Accuses Censorship Attack

In the early hours of last week, several daily newspapers circulating across Punjab were reportedly held back at railway stations and bus depots after a routine police inspection. The delay, which lasted between 30 minutes and an hour, sparked an immediate backlash from opposition leaders, who accused the Punjab Police of an “unprecedented censorship attack” on the free press.

What Happened?

According to the article on NewsbytesApp, the police officers stationed at key transport hubs in Amritsar, Ludhiana, and Chandigarh requested copies of the day's print editions from the distribution teams. The officers claimed they were following a new directive issued by the state government to “ensure public safety by screening potentially seditious material.” The checks were reportedly carried out on a few selected newspapers—primarily the Punjab Tribune, Jagran, and Dainik Bhaskar—which have historically had a large readership in the state.

The police spokesperson, identified in the article as Assistant Commissioner Sanjay Rao, explained that the new guidelines were introduced in response to “increasingly volatile political rhetoric” that could “incite violence during election rallies.” He further added that the checks were meant to be a precautionary measure, not a tool for suppressing dissent.

Opposition representatives were not satisfied with this explanation. The senior Congress leader from Punjab, Pritam Singh, issued a press release—linked within the article—denouncing the move as a “direct attack on the constitutional right to freedom of expression.” He demanded an independent inquiry and a formal apology from the police.

Opposition’s Perspective

The opposition’s statements echo a broader national debate over the role of security forces in monitoring the press. In their press release, the Congress delegation highlighted the historical role of newspapers as watchdogs, warning that any form of censorship—especially in a politically charged environment—could undermine democratic processes. The opposition also pointed out that similar police checks had not been applied to state-run media or to newspapers that were in favor of the ruling party.

“We are witnessing a chilling effect on the press,” Singh said. “If newspapers are being stopped from reaching the public, the people will be deprived of their right to know.”

Police’s Justification

In a separate statement, the Punjab Police defended their actions as a “necessary measure to prevent the spread of misinformation.” They referred to a directive issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which required all news outlets to submit a copy of each edition to the police within 24 hours of publication. The police’s official website, which the article links to, provides a PDF of the directive and an FAQ explaining how it aligns with the Indian Constitution’s provision for “public safety.”

The FAQ acknowledges that the directive “does not constitute censorship but a compliance measure to prevent the dissemination of content that could incite violence.” It also states that the police will review only “content that is suspected of violating law and order.”

Impact on Distribution

The practical effect of the police checks was a measurable delay in newspaper delivery. In Amritsar, for example, the Punjab Tribune arrived 45 minutes late at the main railway station, while the Jagran missed the early morning commuter rush in Ludhiana. Distribution companies, in an interview cited in the article, complained that the sudden stop had disrupted their schedules, leading to a backlog that took hours to clear.

Political Reactions

The state’s Chief Minister, whom the article identifies as Amarinder Singh, issued a statement that balanced the police’s concerns with a call for media freedom. “We are working to ensure the safety of our citizens while respecting the democratic right to free press,” he wrote. He added that the government was “open to reviewing the directive in light of feedback from all stakeholders.”

The article also links to a commentary piece by a former press secretary, who argues that the police’s role should be strictly confined to law enforcement, not media regulation. The commentary emphasizes that any perceived interference could erode public trust in both the press and the state.

Broader Context

India’s press freedom has been under scrutiny for years. In 2023, a Supreme Court ruling upheld the constitutionality of “defamation” clauses but warned against any “unwarranted” restrictions on media. The article references a 2022 study by the Committee to Protect Journalists that documented a rise in police interventions in newsrooms across several states, including Punjab.

The opposition’s reaction also taps into a long-standing narrative that the ruling party’s security apparatus has been used to stifle dissent. In the years leading up to the 2024 state elections, several opposition parties had accused the police of acting as a “political instrument,” especially during election rallies.

What Comes Next?

The article ends by noting that the Punjab Police have agreed to convene a “task force” with media representatives to fine-tune the new guidelines. An independent inquiry, as demanded by the opposition, has yet to be launched. Meanwhile, newspapers are expected to continue operating under the new protocol, with a promise from the government to review the directive after six months.

For readers seeking deeper insight, the article links to the full police directive, the opposition’s press release, and the Supreme Court’s 2023 press freedom ruling. The combined information paints a complex picture of a state grappling with the twin imperatives of maintaining public order and safeguarding democratic liberties.