Bombay High Court quashes changes in IT rules

New Delhi: The Bombay High Court on Friday struck down the 2023 amendments to the IT Rules, terming them unconstitutional. Under these amendments, the central government was allowed to set up a fact check unit to identify and debunk ‘fake and misleading’ information about its functioning on social media platforms.

Hearing a petition filed against the changes made in the IT rules, a tie-breaker bench of Justice Atul Chandurkar said, “I am of the view that the amendments violate Article 14 and Article 19 of the Constitution of India”. Justice Chandurkar on Friday said that the rules violated constitutional provisions. The judge said, “I have considered the matter in detail. The impugned rules violate Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom and right to carry on business) of the Constitution of India.”

The matter came to the tie-breaker judge after a division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Dr Neela Gokhale delivered separate verdicts in January 2024. On this, Justice Chandurkar said that the amendments to the IT Act also violate Article 21 and do not satisfy the test of proportionality.

Let us tell you that in 2023, the Central Government amended the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules 2021). But Rule 3, which empowers the Center to create a fact check unit to identify false online news, faced criticism and legal challenges.

A petition was filed in the court against this. The petitioners, including stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra, argued that the amendments made by the government were ultra vires of Section 79 of the Information Technology Act and violated the Constitution’s right to equality (Article 14) and freedom to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business (Article 19(1)(a)(g)).

In a January 2024 judgment of the Bombay High Court, Justice Patel had held that the proposed fact check unit directly violates the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) due to the differential treatment between online and print content. However, Justice Gokhale, on the other hand, had said that the amendments to the IT Rules were not unconstitutional.

He also said that the allegations of potential bias raised by the petitioners were baseless. There was no restriction on freedom of expression, nor do the amendments suggest any punitive consequences for users. The 2023 amendments were rejected by a 2-1 decision, with the opinion of the tie-breaker judge.