In a significant observation, the Supreme Court on Friday said that if the government blocks any objectionable content available online, it does not amount to violation of freedom of expression.
“Prima facie, we don’t find anything wrong with the rules. In a huge country like India, something published somewhere creates havoc, particularly in religious issues. We have to look at this in a holistic way,” said a bench of justices H.L. Gokhale and J. Chelameswar while declining to stay rules framed by the Centre mandating websites to remove objectionable post within 36 hours from networking sites after receiving a complaint.
The court’s observations came during the hearing of a petition filed by the website mouthshut.com, challenging the rule under the Information Technology Act, which says that an intermediary, which is the entity whose resource has been used for accessing Internet or putting content on Internet, should act within “36 hours and where applicable, work with user or owner of such information to disable such information” after information on objectionable content has brought to notice. The website argued that the rule is against freedom of expression.
The Supreme Court cited how rumours on clashes in Burma had forced people from the Northeast to leave Bengaluru in droves last year. “You know how rumours were spread. Something happened in Burma and Northeast people in Bengaluru had to leave the city. We have a host of problems in this country. What is wrong with the rules? Serious things have happened because of such posts,” the bench remarked.