<p>Experts say the Karnataka government’s draft bill to regulate the spread of false information online remains vague in its intent despite revision. The latest version has dropped ‘fake news’ from the title and reduced punishments. It is now titled the Karnataka Misinformation Regulation Bill, 2025.</p>.<p>Tanveer Hasan, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, notes that the draft seems to have lost sight of its original goal. “The bill was supposed to cultivate fact-checking among the citizens,” he reasons. However, he calls the draft “a good first step” and welcomes the reduced punishments and inclusion of corrective and disabling actions. Though mentioning fake news “as an annexure would have been ideal”, he adds.</p>.<p>Data activist Thejesh G N says the bill “looks reasonable on the surface, but the danger lies in its vagueness”. It targets those who spread rather than create content. “A dataset later proven wrong could be treated as misinformation, and writers could be penalised even if they relied on verified sources,” he warns.</p>.<p>Exclusion of satire, religious discourse, and opinion is another loophole. “Someone could spread misinformation under the garb of religious discourse and wouldn’t fall under the law,” he says.</p>.<p>Public interest technologist Anivar Aravind says, “The state does have constitutional authority to legislate on public order, but the current draft does not meet the constitutional test. The definitions are subjective and risk criminalising lawful expression.”</p>.Karnataka govt drops 'fake news' clause in latest draft law on misinformation regulation.<p>He finds the Centre’s Digital India Act similarly executive-heavy. “Both the Centre and states are centralising control instead of creating rights-respecting, evidence-based frameworks. Poorly drafted bills will deepen the problem,” he adds.</p>.<p><strong>Key changes</strong></p>.<p>According to Apar Gupta, advocate and director of the Internet Freedom Foundation, there are four key changes in the new draft. He explains, “It deletes the ‘fake news’ offence, scraps the minister-led authority, raises the threshold for an offence by limiting ‘communication’ to messages sent to at least 10 people, and softens penalties by reducing jail terms, dropping large fixed fines, and adding exemptions.”</p>.<p>But the bill’s core remains the same. “It still covers any false or inaccurate factual statement as misinformation and criminalises speech. These offences remain non-bailable, with stringent bail hurdles,” Gupta notes. </p>.<p><strong>Legal side</strong></p>.<p>Advocate Indra Dhanush believes the government should reinstate the fake news clause and “declare it a penal offence with strict punishment and compensation for victims”.</p>.<p>He explains, “In today’s world of the Internet and AI, fake news triggers riots, mob attacks, and public humiliation.”</p>.<p>Currently, Sections 196, 353, 352, and 351(4) of the BNS can be invoked, and Section 66D of the IT Act can apply if fake or inaccurate statements are spread online, he states.</p>.<p><strong>Misinformation vs fake news</strong></p>.<p>Misinformation means knowingly or unknowingly making a false, inaccurate, or misleading statement, while fake news means doing so with intent, says Dhanush.</p>.<p>Hasan feels the two terms are often used interchangeably and calls fake news “a subset of misinformation”.</p>
<p>Experts say the Karnataka government’s draft bill to regulate the spread of false information online remains vague in its intent despite revision. The latest version has dropped ‘fake news’ from the title and reduced punishments. It is now titled the Karnataka Misinformation Regulation Bill, 2025.</p>.<p>Tanveer Hasan, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, notes that the draft seems to have lost sight of its original goal. “The bill was supposed to cultivate fact-checking among the citizens,” he reasons. However, he calls the draft “a good first step” and welcomes the reduced punishments and inclusion of corrective and disabling actions. Though mentioning fake news “as an annexure would have been ideal”, he adds.</p>.<p>Data activist Thejesh G N says the bill “looks reasonable on the surface, but the danger lies in its vagueness”. It targets those who spread rather than create content. “A dataset later proven wrong could be treated as misinformation, and writers could be penalised even if they relied on verified sources,” he warns.</p>.<p>Exclusion of satire, religious discourse, and opinion is another loophole. “Someone could spread misinformation under the garb of religious discourse and wouldn’t fall under the law,” he says.</p>.<p>Public interest technologist Anivar Aravind says, “The state does have constitutional authority to legislate on public order, but the current draft does not meet the constitutional test. The definitions are subjective and risk criminalising lawful expression.”</p>.Karnataka govt drops 'fake news' clause in latest draft law on misinformation regulation.<p>He finds the Centre’s Digital India Act similarly executive-heavy. “Both the Centre and states are centralising control instead of creating rights-respecting, evidence-based frameworks. Poorly drafted bills will deepen the problem,” he adds.</p>.<p><strong>Key changes</strong></p>.<p>According to Apar Gupta, advocate and director of the Internet Freedom Foundation, there are four key changes in the new draft. He explains, “It deletes the ‘fake news’ offence, scraps the minister-led authority, raises the threshold for an offence by limiting ‘communication’ to messages sent to at least 10 people, and softens penalties by reducing jail terms, dropping large fixed fines, and adding exemptions.”</p>.<p>But the bill’s core remains the same. “It still covers any false or inaccurate factual statement as misinformation and criminalises speech. These offences remain non-bailable, with stringent bail hurdles,” Gupta notes. </p>.<p><strong>Legal side</strong></p>.<p>Advocate Indra Dhanush believes the government should reinstate the fake news clause and “declare it a penal offence with strict punishment and compensation for victims”.</p>.<p>He explains, “In today’s world of the Internet and AI, fake news triggers riots, mob attacks, and public humiliation.”</p>.<p>Currently, Sections 196, 353, 352, and 351(4) of the BNS can be invoked, and Section 66D of the IT Act can apply if fake or inaccurate statements are spread online, he states.</p>.<p><strong>Misinformation vs fake news</strong></p>.<p>Misinformation means knowingly or unknowingly making a false, inaccurate, or misleading statement, while fake news means doing so with intent, says Dhanush.</p>.<p>Hasan feels the two terms are often used interchangeably and calls fake news “a subset of misinformation”.</p>