Apex court strikes down Section 66A of IT Act

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which could land a person in jail for up to three years for posting “offensive, annoying or inconvenient” materials on Internet.

A bench of justices J Chelameswar and R F Nariman held Section 66A of the IT Act as “unconstitutional” for being in conflict with fundamental right of freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution.

The court found that the provision would not fall within the reasonable restrictions of the freedom of speech as enshrined in the Constitution.

The court, however, upheld validity of Section 69A of the Act which allowed the government to block websites which could affect sovereignty and integrity of the country, defence, security, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence. The verdict came as a relief to the growing social media users, who felt the statutory provision obstructed free speech, discussion, dissent, exchange of ideas and satire on social platforms.

The court held: “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 of the day would be caught within its net. 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.”

Finding the grounds of arrest were vague, the court said that liberty of thought and expression is a cardinal value and of paramount significance. “What may be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another,” the court said.

The apex court also agreed to the petitioners’ plea that the right to know of the public was affected by the legal provision.

Law graduate Shreya Singhal was the first to approach the court in 2012, challenging the law after two girls were arrested for their comment on shutdown in Mumbai following death of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray.

The provision was not enshrined in the IT Act 2000, but brought through an amendment in 2009 by the United Progressive Alliance government.

The regime change in 2014, however, saw no change of stand as the NDA government strongly defended the law. This was though in reversal of their stand on scrapping the provision.

“The government was committed to free speech and Section 66A would be used only when excesses were perpetrated,” the government said.

The court, however, was not convinced. “Governments may come and governments may go but Section 66A goes on forever. An assurance from the present government even if carried out faithfully would not bind any successor government,” it added.

Union IT and Communication Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad also welcomed the judgment. “We respect the freedom of speech and expression. We respect communication of ideas on social media and we are not in favour of curtailing communication of honest dissent, opinion, disapproval or criticism on social media,” he said.