Use of Section 66A of IT Act despite it being struck down matter of serious concern: SC

The bench also comprising Justice S Ravindra Bhat asked Advocate Zoheb Hossain, who appeared on behalf of the Centre, to get in touch with the concerned Chief Secretaries of the respective states where the offences are still being registered and impress upon them “to take remedial measures as early as possible”.

The court was hearing an application by NGO People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), which said that the provision was still being invoked in many cases even after the top court ruled against it.

On March 24, 2015, in the case Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 in its entirety, and ruled that it was violative of Article 19(1)(a). The court ruled that “it is clear that Section 66A arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free speech and upsets the balance between such right and the reasonable restrictions that may be imposed on such right”.

Appearing for the NGO, Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh said that after the apex court issued notice on the application, some of the states had filed replies and that what “has come out is really shocking”.

Hossain said the Centre had filed an affidavit pointing out that the government has communicated the judgment to all Chief Secretaries of the states and administrators of Union Territories.

Referring to the affidavits filed pursuant to its notice, the bench said “most of the states have unequivocally submitted before us that the directions issued in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India are being scrupulously observed and followed. And that no case is presently pending in respect of alleged offence under Section 66A of the Act.”

It added, “However, there still appears some instances where the concerned provision was… invoked and the offences in that behalf are still pending consideration”.

The court asked Hossain to write to the Chief Secretaries asking for relevant information “in order to have complete assessment of the entire problem”. It also directed that the exercise be completed in three weeks time.