New Delhi/Kolkata/Mumbai, March 24: The Supreme Court Tuesday struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology (IT) Act, a controversial provision used to arrest people for their social media postings. The verdict was hailed by the victims, who described it as a victory for the common man’s free speech.
“Section 66A of the IT Act is struck down in its entirety…,” said an apex court bench of Justice J Chelameswar and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman. The provision was so vaguely worded that anyone could be arrested for “annoying and offensive” postings on a complaint even by a single individual.
“Our constitution provides for liberty of thought, expression and belief. In a democracy, these values have to be provided within constitutional scheme. The law (Section 66A) is vague in its entirety,” said Justice Nariman pronouncing the judgment.
“There is no nexus between public order and discussion or causing annoyance by dissemination of information. Curbs under Section 66A of the IT Act infringe on the public right to know.”
Minister for information and technology Ravi Shankar Prasad said the government did not favour gagging dissent or honest criticism expressed on social media. “We respect communication of ideas on social media, not in favour of curtailing honest criticism, dissent on social media,” he told the media.
Jadavpur University professor Ambikesh Mahapatra, who was arrested under the section in 2012 for circulating emails mocking West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, told IANS: “This is a victory of the common man’s freedom of speech.” Having read down Section 66A, the court also struck down the Section 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act. The apex court order came on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of 66A of the IT Act on the grounds that it was vague and ambiguous and was being misused by the law enforcing authorities.
The court was moved in 2012 following the arrest of two young women — Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan — for posting comments critical of the Mumbai shutdown following the death of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray.
Section 66A reads: “Any person who sends by any means of a computer resource any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character; or any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.”
The Centre defended section 66A, taking the stand that the provisions in no way intended to curb the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19. At the same time, it said the enormous cyber world could not be left unregulated. IANS
