The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the argument of the Jammu and Kashmir government that it opted for a blanket suspension of Internet services in the Valley because it lacked the technology to allow selective online access.
“If such a contention is accepted, the government would have a free pass to put a complete Internet blockage every time. Such complete blocking/prohibition perpetually cannot be accepted by this court,” the court said.
However, it noted that there was “ample merit” in the government’s argument that Internet could be used to propagate terrorism in J&K, thereby challenging the sovereignty and integrity of the nation.
But the court made it a point to observe that peace in J&K should be achieved without “excessively burdening” the fundamental right of free speech. It held that a restriction imposed on fundamental rights without appropriate justification was disproportionate. The goal behind a restriction should be legitimate. The degree and scope of a restriction should be proportionate what was actually necessary to combat an emergency.
The authorities ought to opt for a lesser intrusive mechanism if the same the goal could be attained through that. The State should resort to the least restrictive measure while taking into consideration the facts and circumstances. A restriction should be supported by sufficient material and amenable to judicial review, the court said.
