The Supreme Court is expected to deliver a verdict on the validity of Section 66A of the Information and Technology Act 2000, on Tuesday. The Section gives the police powers to arrest those who post objectionable content online and provides for a three-year jail term.
A bench of justices J. Chelameswar and R.F. Nariman had on 26 February reserved its judgement on one of the most controversial issues regarding the freedom of expression that the court has had to deal with in recent times. The verdict was reserved after the government concluded its arguments contending that section 66A of the Information Technology Act cannot be declared unconstitutional merely because of the possibility of its “abuse”.
The government said it did not want to curtail the freedom of speech and expression but contended that the cyber space could not be allowed to remain unregulated. During hearing however, the court had found several issues with the wording of the law. In particular, it said that terms like ‘grossly offensive’ and ‘of menacing character’, used to classify content as illegal, were vague expressions and these words were likely to be misunderstood and abused.
The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by a law student Shreya Singhal, who sought amendment in Section 66A of the Act, after two girls—Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan—were arrested in Palghar in Thane district as one of them posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s death and the other ‘liked’ it. The apex court had on 16 May 2013, come out with an advisory that a person, accused of posting objectionable comments on social networking sites, cannot be arrested without police getting permission from senior officers like the IG or the DCP.
>In pics: Like it or not, comment is not free “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever,” | >A hidden landmine in the IT Act? Does Section 66A curb or safeguard the social media? Here is everything you should know. | >An unreasonable restriction, this 66A Section 66A does not engage in balancing required to prevent criminal intimidation on social media. |
