The 31st January decision of Justice Gautam Patel of the Bombay High Court in a bunch of petitions, popularly known as the Kunal Kamra’s case, stands out for its compelling articulation of the constitutional fundamentals in relation to the right of free speech on “social media.” Uncoerced by the climate of our times, The learned Judge has reiterated the sacrosanctity of the inviolate constitutional guarantee of free speech, not to be tinkered with or read down, except for the reasonable restrictions thereon as envisaged in Article 19(2), (6) of the Constitution. The affirmation of this constitutional right and its eloquent defence against State encroachment by the distinguished Judge is reassuring, even though his decision on the subject is not yet binding, because of a split verdict by the Division Bench.
The context of the decision is the amended Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules 2021, widely perceived as arbitrary and unjust. Relevant extracts of the Rule are reproduced below:
“3(1)…(b) the intermediary…shall make reasonable efforts by itself, and to cause the users of its computer resource to not host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update or share any information that, — (v) …in respect of any business of the Central Government, is identified as fake or false or misleading by such fact check unit of the Central Government as the Ministry may, by notification published in the Official Gazette, specify.”
