Which of the following would be construed as a reasonable restriction of the ‘right to freedom’?

The 'Right to Freedom' under Article 19 is not absolute and is subject to 'reasonable restrictions' to balance individual rights with social welfare [2]. Option 1 is a valid restriction as the State can regulate speech and expression in the interest of public order and morality [3]. Option 2 is valid because Article 15(2) prohibits discrimination in access to public places maintained by State funds, and forming associations (Article 19(1)(c)) is subject to morality [3]. Option 3 is a recognized restriction under Article 19(5), which allows the State to impose limitations on the right to reside and settle (Article 19(1)(e)) or move freely for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe [4]. Since all three scenarios represent constitutionally permissible limitations aimed at public order, morality, or protecting vulnerable groups, they are all construed as reasonable restrictions.

Sources

1. [1] Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 2: RIGHTS IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION > Other freedoms > p. 35
2. [2] Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 121
3. [3] Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Thus- > p. 120
4. [4] https://www.mea.gov.in/images/pdf1/part3.pdf