A s a nonlawyer and engineer, i cannot authoritatively comment on the supreme court s order in shreya singhal vs union of india 2015 on sections of the information technology act of 2000, so i have tried to summarise a variety of views. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc. The offence under section 66a of it act being cognizable, law enforcement. The section 66a of the it act penalizes sending false and offensive messages through communication services. Mar 30, 2016 union of india, the supreme court of india struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 on the grounds that the section has a chilling effect on the right to freedom of speech. This act was substantially amended through the information technology amendment act 2008 in 2008. The supreme court friday directed all state governments to sensitise their police personnel about its march 24, 2015 verdict which had scrapped section 66a of information technology act. The supreme court said that section 66a is vague and violative of the fundamental right to freedom of speech. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000, relating to restrictions on online speech, as unconstitutional on grounds of violating. Section 66a of the it act defines the punishment for sending. Supreme court jail threat for officials abusing section 66a. Section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000 is all about.
The apex court ruled that the controversial section 66a is open ended, undefined, and vague with every expression used in it nebulous in meaning. This section had been widely misused by police in various states. Mar 24, 2015 the supreme court has quashed section 66a of the information technology act on tuesday, terming it vague and unconstitutional. Pathan was aptly booked under section 66a of the act as he circulated messages through a cellphone. Section 66a of it act is unconstitutional, supreme court rules. Supreme court upholds free speech on internet, scraps unconstitutional section 66a of it act the sc on tuesday upheld free speech online as it struck down the section 66a of the information. Supreme court upholds freedom of speech on the internet. This meant that all section 66a, old ones, existing ones, and fresh ones would stop. Ensure section 66a of it act is not invoked, supreme court. Section 66a which was routinely abused to prosecute people for online posts was declared unconstitutional by the supreme court in march, 2015 no fresh 66a cases.
The supreme court on friday directed all state governments, police departments, and courts across india to ensure that section 66a of the it act which was scrapped by it in 2015 is not invoked against anyone. Mar 24, 2015 the supreme court of india today struck down section 66a of the information technology act a controversial law that allowed law enforcement officials to arrest people for posting offensive comments on social networks and other internet sites. Mar 24, 2015 on march 24, 2015, the supreme court of india struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000, describing it as unconstitutional. On the ground, sc ruling on section 66a is frequently violated.
November 2018 to may 2019 under the national security act for a provocative. Section 66a is unconstitutional and we have no hesitation in striking it down, said justice r f nariman, reading out. The supreme court on tuesday quashed section 66a of the information technology act, which provides the government power to arrest a person. Section 66a of the it act was introduced in a hastilypassed. Supreme court judgment on section 66a of information.
Supreme court strikes down section 66a of it act which allowed arrests for objectionable content online. Supreme court terms sec 66a of it act unconstitutional. On the ground, sc ruling on section 66a is frequently violated in refusing to keep the application alive even when a majority of statesuts had not yet furnished replies, the court has again made the. The amended act which received the assent of the president on february 5, 2009, contains section 66a. Why the court struck down this provision, issues associated and issues over implementation of court s order. Supreme court strikes down section 66a of it act which. The supreme court is examining the constitutional validity of section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000. Sc in its ruling held that section 66a interferes with freedom of speech and expression envisaged under article 19 of constitution of india and also hit the root of two. Mar 24, 2015 the supreme court today ruled on a series of cases challenging the it act, including section 66a 3 years in prison for offensive statements online, section 79 and its rules forcing. Download supreme court judgment in pdf as to scrapping of section 66a in the matter of shreya singhal v union of india dated.
Not only because of how robustly the supreme court came to the defence of free speech, but also because it is quite rare for the court to strike down an offence as unconstitutional. Union of india spurred by the 66a arrests, this petition was filed in public interest before the supreme court challenging the constitutionality of sections 66a, 69a and 80 of the it act. The erstwhile section 66a of the it act, provided for punishment for sending offensive messages through communication services. The inspector first said that the top court did not give any such judgement, then later said, the supreme court must have said that in one particular case only and the section remains in the act. Supreme court upholds free speech on internet, scraps. Aug 06, 2015 in a landmark judgment upholding freedom of expression, the supreme court has struck down section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000 it act, a provision in the. Supreme court delivered a judgement striking down section 66 a of the information technology act, 2000. As the federal government argued to the court of appeals below, the prompt resolution of this case will help reduce uncertainty in the healthcare sector. The supreme court has issued notice in an application filed by peoples union for civil liberties pucl, on the continued use of section 66a of the information technology act. Why police still make arrests under it act section 66a, years after it was struck down lawyer apar gupta, who coauthored a recent report on the subject, explains the. The court first analysed the provisions of section 66a in relation to the. In a landmark judgment delivered on march 24, 2015 the supreme court struck down section 66a of the it act holding that the same infringed on the.
On 24 march 2015, the supreme court of india, gave the verdict that section 66a is unconstitutional in entirety. Police continue to make arrests using unconstitutional. The supreme court on tuesday quashed the controversial section 66a of the information technology it act, which criminalises causing annoyance or inconvenience online or electronically, saying the section violated the fundamental right to freedom of expression, under article 191 a. The court further held that the section was not saved by virtue of being a reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech under article 19 2. Dec 11, 2012 debate on the validity of section 66a of it.
Union of india, the supreme court of india struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 on the grounds that the section has a. The supreme court rules, 19661 in exercise of the powers conferred by article 145 of the constitution, and all other powers enabling it in this behalf, the supreme court hereby makes, with theapprovalofthepresident,thefollowingrules,namely. By quashing section 66a of the it act as unconstitutional, the supreme court judgment shows us that with the right kind of conviction, it is possible to. Supreme court quashes section 66a of it act 6 min read. The supreme court ruled in september 2018 that the governments. This section was not in the act as originally enacted, but. Supreme court s full judgment on section 66a of it act court said the publics right to know is directly affected by section 66a of the it act. Pucl has submitted that the harm emanating from this state of affairs is enormous. Shreya singhal, the supreme court held that at the stage of.
They believed that the term offensive in section 66a of it act is very vague. The court said that section 66a of it act 2000 is arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free speech provided under article 191 of the constitution of india. In their order, the court said, section 66a is violative of article 191a, not saved by article 192, hence unconstitutional. The controversial section has long been decried by activists.
Section 66a of the information technology act the centre. The supreme court on tuesday declared section 66a of information technology act as unconstitutional and struck it down. In their order, the court said, section 66a is violative of article. Act, 2000 hereinafter it act was addressed by the supreme court in this case. In a landmark judgment upholding freedom of expression, the supreme court has struck down section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000 it act. Besides indicating disregard for the constitution and the supreme court, the continued use of section 66a of the it act is a direct violation of the fundamental rights under articles 191a and 21 of the persons against whom the provision is invoked. As the seventh circuit summarized the cases, airlines labor inputs are affected by a network of labor laws, including minimum wage laws, workersafety laws, antidiscrimination laws, and pension regulations.
This was in response to a pil that challenged the constitutionality of this provision. Union of india 1, where the supreme court held that the freedom of speech and. Aside from section 66a, section 69a and intermediary guidelines made under section 79 of the act were also challenged. A background to section 66a of the it act, 2000 prsindia. Section 66a of information technology act upsc online ias. On march 24, 2015, the supreme court of india struck down section 66a of the. Supreme court strikes down section 66a of information. Sc asks states to sensitise cops about scrapping of.
Supreme courts full judgment on section 66a of it act. The supreme court on monday threatened to jail any official responsible for the continued prosecution and harassment of people under section 66a of the information technology act, which the court had struck down as unconstitutional in 2015. In a landmark judgment upholding freedom of expression, the supreme court has struck down section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000 it act, a provision in the cyber law which provides power to arrest a person for posting allegedly offensive content on websites. Supreme court issues notice to the centre for continued. Section 66a is cast so widely that virtually any opinion on any subject would be covered by it, as any serious opinion dissenting with the mores.
The law that could land you in jail for a whatsapp forward has gone. More information on section 66a of information technology act, 2000. A few minutes ago, the supreme court delivered a judgement striking down section 66 a of the information technology act, 2000. Instead, the district court merely suggested that arkansass requirement might unduly burden some women in a portion of arkansas. Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device. Supreme court judgment in pdf as to scrapping of section 66a in the matter of shreya singhal v union of india 2015 summary. The case involved the harassment of a minor girl, and sections 67, 67b, of the it act, and section 509 of the ipc, which deal with obscenity and insulting the modesty of a woman. Section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 is struck down in its entirety being violative of article 191a and not saved under article 192. Section 66a of the information technology act repealed.
Feb 24, 2019 sc quashes section 66a the supreme court on tuesday quashed section 66a of the information technology act, which provides the government power to arrest a person for posting allegedly offensive content on websites. Such is the reach of the section and if it is to withstand the test of constitutionality, the chilling effect on free speech would be total, justices j. In the case in hand, the court addressed the constitutionality of the provision. A batch of petitions have alleged that the section tramples upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, and asked that it be declared unconstitutional. After marathon arguments, the supreme court on thursday reserved its orders on pleas challenging the validity of provisions of the it act giving powers to arrest those who write offensive posts on. The information technology act, 2000 was amended in 2008. The supreme court agreed with the petitioner that none of the grounds contained in section 192 were capable of being invoked as legitimate defences to the validity of section 66a of the it act. On march 24, 2015, the supreme court of india struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000, describing it as unconstitutional. The judgment of the supreme court, in pdf format pdf 448 kb, can. Yet petitioners argue that this court should not just grant. Shreya singhal and 66a centre for internet and society. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the information technology act. The supreme court and unconstitutional crimes shreya singhal is a landmark decision.
A s a nonlawyer and engineer, i cannot authoritatively comment on the supreme courts order in shreya singhal vs union of india 2015 on sections of the information technology act of 2000, so i have tried to summarise a variety of views of experts in this article. After hearing a clutch of petitions by defenders of free speech, the supreme court described the 2009 amendment to indias information technology act known as section 66a as vague and ambiguous and beyond ambit of the constitutional right to freedom of speech. In their order, the court said, section 66a is violative of article 191a, not saved by article 192. In this article, we give you a list of 25 of the most important sc. This had led to the supreme court striking it down as unconstitutional in march, 2015 in shreya singhal v. It is argued that the grounds for incrimination under 66a are beyond the scope of reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights allowed by. Freedom of speech has a historic day in india today as the apex judicial body, supreme court, declared section 66a of the it act unconstitutional, ruling against the central government which had. In april last year, a local court in telangana sentenced a man by invoking section 66a, ignoring the supreme courts order. Supreme court issues notice to the centre for continued use of. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000, relating to restrictions on online speech, as unconstitutional on grounds of violating the freedom of speech guaranteed under article 191. Supreme court s full judgment on section 66a of it act. The supreme court of india invalidated section 66a of the information technology act of 2000 in its entirety. Justices j chelameswar and rohinton f nariman passing the judgement said that 66a the court cannot go by the governments assurances that the section will not be misused as that cannot be properly implemented because governments come and go but section 66a will exist forever.
Before the honourable supreme court of india civil appellate. In light of this, we present a background to section 66 a and the recent developments leading up to its challenge before the court. Supreme court judgements are very important to have a better understanding of the constitution of the country. Recently a pil has been filed in front of supreme court, saying the section 66a of it act is unconstitutional and void on the basis that it violates article 14, 19 1a and article 21 of the constitution. Section 66 a it act information technology act supreme court strikes down sec 66a internet freedom 66a 66a of it act 66 a. As arrests under defunct section 66a continue, supreme. Why the court struck down this provision, issues associated and issues over implementation of courts order. Mar 27, 2015 why supreme court scraped section 66a of it act. The supreme court on monday sent a notice to the centre seeking a response within four weeks regarding people being prosecuted under section 66 a of the information technology act. Supreme court reserves orders on validity of section 66a. Though up from 66 the previous year,20 the results suggest poor. The supreme court sc on 24 march 2015 struck down the section 66a of the information and technology act 2000 calling it unconstitutional and untenable. The whole act is very widely drafted which allows various interpretations by the law enforcement.
Supreme court expresses shock at people still being. Yesterday, the supreme court of india issued notice to the central government for the continued use of section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 the it act, despite the provision being struck down from the statute books as unconstitutional by the supreme court in its landmark judgment. Mar 24, 2015 section 66a of the amended indian information technology act, 2000 is all about. According to supreme court judgement on sec 66a of it act, the word offensive is so vague that it can cover almost everything. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the information technology act, 2000, relating to restrictions on online speech, as unconstitutional on grounds of violating the freedom of speech guaranteed under article 191a of the constitution of india. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the it act in. They stated that what might offensive to someone may not be for someone. Section 66a makes it an offense to send, by means of a computer resource or communication device, any of the following information. Many questions have been asked in the upsc exam about various landmark sc judgements in the past. Further, in creating an offence, section 66a suffers from the vice of vagueness because unlike the offence created by section 66 of the same.
It act judgements, cyber law judgements, cyber case laws. The supreme court sought the centres response to a plea alleging that despite the striking down of draconian section 66a of the it act in 2015 by the apex court, police in various states were still invoking it in firs to clamp down on free speech on social media platforms. Section 66a of the information technology act repealed lexology. Two years ago, on 24 march 2015, online speech or communication got a boost as the supreme court declared a draconian provisionsection 66a of the information technology act, 2000. Sc strikes down sec 66a of it act, calls it unconstitutional. Pdf section 66 a of the information technology act 2000 inserted vide amendment in 2008 was struck down by the supreme court in the. Section 66a had been dubbed as draconian for it allowed the arrest of several innocent persons, igniting a public outcry for its scrapping. On march 24, 2015, the supreme court in its famous judgement in the shreya singhal case, struck down the infamous and muchdreaded section 66a of the information technology act the apex court s ruling, authored by justices rohinton nariman and jasti chelameswar, was hailed as a major victory by advocates of free speech. The supreme court struck down section 66a of the it act in 2015, why are cops still using it to make arrests. Mar 24, 2015 section 66a of the information technology act is unconstitutional in its entirety, the supreme court ruled on tuesday striking down a draconian provision that had led to the arrests of many. Union of india is a judgement by a twojudge bench of the supreme court of india in 2015, on the issue of online speech and intermediary liability in india. Section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 is struck down in its entirety being violative of article 19 1 a and not saved under article 19 2.
Section 66 a of it act unconstitutional and untenable. On the ground, sc ruling on section 66a is frequently. Section 66a of information technology act, 2000 is. Section 66a of it act scraped by supreme court go sarkari. The supreme court of india initially issued an interim measure in singhal v. Mar 24, 2015 the first case in the supreme court, which was filed in late 2012 by law student shreya singhal, was quickly followed by a slew of petitions. The apex court says section 66a is clearly vague with every expression used in it being nebulous. It invades the right to free speech and expression excessively.
542 391 558 962 1520 489 843 54 253 40 921 275 1045 458 111 1502 1264 1388 144 1545 32 526 269 581 1494 410 563 1359 55 508 1239 314