In a major development, the Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni on Saturday stayed the provision of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules (IT rules) of 2021, which mandates all online portals to adhere to certain set of code while publishing anything on the internet. The bench, however, didn't stay the provisions of the new Rules that provided for action against those, who wouldn't adhere to the code of ethics.
The bench was hearing petitions filed by legal news portal The Leaflet and senior journalist Nikhil Wagle, both challenging the new Rules stating that the same are an assault on free speech. The duo through senior counsel Darius Khambatta and advocate Abhay Nevagi, respectively, claimed that the new rules aren't needed as the same would lead to gagging media.
The main challenge was to Rules 7, 9, 14 and 16.
Rule 7 - Provides for action against those, who breach the code.
Rule 9 - Mandates for adherence to the code of conduct for all publishers.
Rule 14 - Provides for an Inter-departmental Committee, comprising of officials from various ministries of the Union government, that would look into the complaints against those, who post anything.
Rule 16 - Provides for blocking of objectionable content posted on the internet, in case of emergency.
In their interim orders, pronounced on Saturday evening, the bench didn't stay any of these provisions except for Rule 9 and two of its clauses.
"We may observe that as far as Rule 14 is concerned no urgency is there as the Inter-departmental Committee is yet to be constituted. Even officers under this Rule aren't appointed yet," Chief Justice Datta said, adding, "We grant liberty to urge for leave when the committee is constituted."
"Rule 16 in case of emergency it is pari-materia (same as) of Rule 9 of IT Rules of 2009. There has been no grievance against the Rule 9 till date thus no case is made out to stay this provision," the chief justice pronounced.
As far as Rule 9 is concerned, the chief justice said, "We are of the prima facie opinion that this provision infringes the Article 19 (1) (A) of the Constitution of India. We stay clauses 1 and 3 of Rule 9."
The bench didn't stay Rule 7, for which Nevagi said, "This was one of the most important rule that we challenged. It takes away protection for online users from any kind of action."
The most important development is that the bench has admitted the petition and has called for affidavits and replies from the Union government. It would next hear the matter on September 7.
