New Delhi: After months of uncertainty, the Press Council of India (PCI) has finally got its chairperson, but 13 seats meant for working journalists continue to remain vacant. Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, who earlier headed the PCI from 17 June 2022 to 16 December 2025, resumed charge on 24 April 2026.
The retired Supreme Court judge has been nominated for another three‑year term. However, the council is still incomplete, as seven representatives of working journalists (other than editors) and six journalist‑editors are yet to be selected to complete the 15th Press Council
Notably, two months ago, Rajya Sabha MP Sasmit Patra had urged the Union government to expeditiously constitute the full council to protect democratic values and reinforce media accountability. Speaking in the Upper House on 10 February, the Biju Janata Dal leader said the formation of a full‑fledged PCI after the 14th council’s term ended on 5 October 2024 was critical for maintaining a free, fair, and responsible press.
He particularly stressed the need to appoint a new chairperson, as the PCI had remained headless since 17 December last year, to facilitate completion of the statutory, quasi‑judicial, and autonomous body. Earlier, Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw informed Parliament that the nomination process for members from the working journalists’ category was sub judice before the Delhi High Court.
At present, the PCI has a limited number of functioning members, including Rajya Sabha MPs Sudhanshu Trivedi and Brij Lal; Lok Sabha MPs Sambit Patra, Naresh Mhaske, and Kali Charan Munda; Ashwini K Mohapatra (University Grants Commission); Manan Kumar Mishra (Bar Council of India); K Sreenivasarao (Sahitya Akademi); and Sudhir Kumar Panda, M V Shreyams Kumar, Gurinder Singh, Arun Kumar Tripathi, Braj Mohan Sharma, and Arti Tripathi, who represent newspaper ownership and management across large, medium, and small publications. Efforts are ongoing to fill the remaining 14 seats, although the process has faced several hurdles in recent times.
The 29‑member media watchdog, first constituted in 1966 under the Press Council Act, 1965, and later re‑established in 1979 under the Press Council Act, 1978, was mandated to maintain and improve the standards of newspapers and news agencies in the country.
The Act provides for 13 members representing professional journalists—six editors and seven working journalists from newspapers and news agencies—but all these positions remain vacant even today. Earlier, several media organisations had called for revitalising the PCI and expanding its powers.
The impasse emerged after many national journalists’ bodies opposed a proposed change in PCI rules to select representatives from press clubs instead of recognised national unions of working journalists. They argued that press clubs largely function as recreational bodies with limited geographical reach and often include non‑working journalists—such as academics, writers, film personalities, and diplomats—as members to expand influence. Such practices, they contended, could undermine genuine professional representation.
They further pointed out that even bodies calling themselves “all‑India” press clubs lack truly nationwide representation, whereas recognised journalist unions draw members from across the country. Organisations like the Indian Journalists Union and the All India Working News Cameramen’s Association had approached the courts seeking relief.
With the PCI remaining headless for months—an unprecedented situation in its history—questions were raised about who was safeguarding India’s vast print media ecosystem, comprising over 100,000 registered publications across multiple languages and frequencies, as recognised by the Registrar of Newspapers for India.
Although the PCI has the authority to entertain complaints against newspapers, news agencies, editors, and working journalists for professional misconduct, it has limited enforcement powers when it comes to penalising violations.
Beyond print, India now has nearly 400 satellite news channels and millions of digital platforms, including portals, WhatsApp‑based channels, and other online outlets—all of which remain outside the PCI’s jurisdiction.
In effect, most technology‑driven news platforms are beyond its regulatory ambit. Given that the PCI can also comment on governmental conduct when press freedom is at stake, there is a growing demand to bring television, radio, and digital media under its oversight and correspondingly strengthen its authority.
Against this backdrop, the question remains: can India’s media fraternity hope for a fully constituted and empowered Press Council of India with an expanded reach in the near future?