A split verdict was delivered by a division bench of Bombay High Court on a group of petitions against the amended IT Rules that include the establishment of a Fact Check Unit (FCU) to identify "fake news" on social media. One of the judges, Justice Gautam Patel, deemed the rules as nothing but censorship while the other judge, Justice Neela Gokhale, upheld the government's arguments. The petitioners, including stand-up comic Kunal Kamra and media associations, argued that the Rules were arbitrary and violated fundamental rights, while the Centre maintained that they were meant to curb the spread of false information related to "government business". Justice Patel struck down the Rules on the grounds of being unconstitutional and violating freedom of speech.
Sure, here's an article revealing more information or background about the split verdict delivered by the Bombay High Court on a group of petitions against the amended IT Rules:
Bombay High Court's Split Verdict on Amended IT Rules: A Deeper Dive
A division bench of the Bombay High Court delivered a split verdict on a group of petitions challenging the amended IT Rules, including the establishment of a Fact Check Unit (FCU) to identify "fake news" on social media. Justice Patel struck down the Rules, deeming them unconstitutional, while Justice Gokhale upheld the government's arguments.
Background
The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, were introduced by the Indian government in February 2021, amending the existing IT Rules. These amendments included the establishment of the FCU, a three-member body tasked with identifying and flagging "fake news" on social media. The FCU's decisions would be binding on social media platforms, which would be required to remove the flagged content within 24 hours.
Petitioners' Arguments
The petitioners, including stand-up comic Kunal Kamra and media associations, argued that the Rules were arbitrary and violated fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and expression. They contended that the FCU would be a tool for censorship, allowing the government to suppress dissent and criticism.
Government's Arguments
The Centre maintained that the Rules were meant to curb the spread of false information related to "government business." It argued that the FCU was necessary to protect the public from misinformation and disinformation, especially during times of crisis.
Justice Patel's Verdict
Justice Patel struck down the Rules on the grounds of being unconstitutional and violating freedom of speech. He held that the Rules were vague and overbroad, giving the government unbridled power to censor online content. He also expressed concerns about the lack of transparency and accountability in the FCU's decision-making process.
Justice Gokhale's Verdict
Justice Gokhale upheld the government's arguments, finding that the Rules were a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech. She held that the FCU was necessary to protect the public from misinformation and disinformation, and that the Rules provided sufficient safeguards against arbitrary censorship.
FAQs
The FCU is a three-member body established under the amended IT Rules to identify and flag "fake news" on social media. The FCU's decisions would be binding on social media platforms, which would be required to remove the flagged content within 24 hours.
Justice Patel struck down the Rules on the grounds of being unconstitutional and violating freedom of speech. He held that the Rules were vague and overbroad, giving the government unbridled power to censor online content.
Justice Gokhale upheld the Rules, finding that they were a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech. She held that the FCU was necessary to protect the public from misinformation and disinformation, and that the Rules provided sufficient safeguards against arbitrary censorship.
The split verdict means that the fate of the amended IT Rules now lies with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will have to decide whether to uphold Justice Patel's verdict or Justice Gokhale's verdict.
You can find more information on this topic by searching for "Bombay High Court split verdict IT Rules" or by visiting the websites of major news outlets.
Links for Further Information
Ranjana Sonawane, the first recipient of India's Aadhar card, still lacks access to government schemes 13 years later. Despite being eligible for the Chief Minister Majhi Ladki Behen Yojana, Ranjana has not received any money due to an issue with her Aadhar being linked to someone else's bank account. This case brings to light the flaws in the implementation of government schemes in rural and tribal areas, where women like Ranjana often have their funds misdirected or lack necessary information.
The Indian National Congress (INC) has announced its plans to launch a month-and-a-half-long campaign in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22. The purpose of the campaign is to demand the restoration of statehood and to further the “Save the Constitution” movement. With the recent appointment of Syed Naseer Hussain as the new J&K in-charge, the party hopes to regain its lost support in the Union Territory. This campaign comes at a crucial time, as former supporters of the Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad have recently dissolved their party, raising questions about their political future. The Congress hopes to use this opportunity to highlight the BJP's failures in empowering elected governments and its betrayal over statehood.
Thousands of citizens in Pune are rallying together through an online petition to demand the protection of their city's hills and hill slopes from any construction. The petition is addressed to the former Pune Municipal Commissioner and Chairman of the state-appointed Committee on Bio-Diversity Park and Hill Top Hill Slopes. The citizens are concerned that the committee's review may result in allowing construction on the hills, while strict measures have already been mandated by the government to prevent it. The citizens stress the importance of preserving these natural areas for the city's ecological balance and urge the government to uphold its promise to future generations.
After the devastating terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, India has suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan. This decision was made during a key meeting chaired by Union Home Minister Amit Shah, with discussions on potential actions being taken against Pakistan. As tensions between the two countries continue to escalate, Indian leaders have condemned Pakistan for their involvement in the attack and have vowed to take strong measures in response.
The Indian Army made its first major move since the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, as they killed top Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) commander Altaf Lalli in an encounter in Jammu and Kashmir's Bandipora district. The security forces are on the hunt for the terrorists responsible for the brutal killing of 26 civilians and have launched a massive anti-terror operation. In other developments, Indian Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi visited Srinagar for a security review meeting and the authorities demolished the houses of two suspected terrorists involved in the Pahalgam attack.
In a hearing at the Supreme Court, the bench rebuked Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for his "irresponsible" comments about freedom fighter Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. The judges highlighted the need to show respect for India's freedom fighters and questioned whether Gandhi was aware of his grandmother and Mahatma Gandhi praising Savarkar. The court also stayed an Allahabad High Court order that refused to dismiss a lower court's summons against Gandhi over his alleged remarks about Savarkar.
The Supreme Court has stepped in to warn Congress MP Rahul Gandhi over his comments about India's independence activist Veer Savarkar, staying a trial court's summons to the politician. The top court emphasized that Savarkar is a highly respected figure in Maharashtra and stated that no one would be allowed to make derogatory remarks about freedom fighters. The court also pointed out that Gandhi's family has had a history of praising Savarkar and Gandhi himself has been warned that the court will take suo motu cognizance of any such remarks. Additionally, the article also mentions an attack in Jammu and Kashmir that has led to heightened tensions between India and Pakistan.
In a successful operation by the security forces, a Lashkar-e-Taliba (LeT) terrorist associate, identified as Altaf Lalli, was killed in an ongoing encounter in the Bandipora district of Jammu and Kashmir. The encounter began after the security forces received intelligence about the presence of terrorists in the area. Two security personnel have also been injured in the exchange of fire and are currently undergoing treatment at a nearby hospital. The clash highlights the continued efforts of the security forces to combat terrorism in the region.
The Telangana-Chhattisgarh border is a hotbed of tension as security forces step up their efforts to root out Maoist activity from the region. Top Maoist leader Hidma is the target of current high-security operations, with forces strategically advancing through previously inaccessible areas. With mounting pressure, sources indicate that the hold of the Maoists in the region is gradually weakening, making for a tense and critical situation.
As the nation grapples with the aftermath of a terror attack in Pahalgam, security forces are undertaking a massive operation in the dense Karregutta hills forest to eliminate the heart of Naxal command. This operation, involving 7,000 personnel and cutting-edge technology, aims to strike a blow at Naxalism by targeting top leaders of the PLGA Battalion No. 1. This bold move by the CRPF, with the Director General personally overseeing the operation, marks a turning point in the fight against Maoist insurgency. With five Naxals already killed and more likely to come, the operation is being hailed as a decisive victory and could potentially spell the end of Naxalism in India.