The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 8 January, sought the Centre’s reply on a plea alleging arrests were being made under the scrapped Section 66(A) of the IT Act, news agency PTI reported.
The section which was struck down by the SC in 2015, criminalised messages communicated on the Internet and were “grossly offensive” or “caused annoyance”. The apex court had quashed the section, calling it "vague" and "unconstitutional".
In a petition, non-profit group People’s Union for Civil Liberties or PUCL alleged that over 22 people have been prosecuted under the section, even after its scrapping.
A bench of Justices Rohinton Nariman and Vineet Saran said that the officials who ordered the arrests will be sent to jail.
It has also asked the Centre to reply within four weeks.
Terming liberty of thought and expression as “cardinal”, a bench of Justices J Chelameswar and RF Nariman said in 2015, “The public’s right to know is directly affected by Section 66A of the Information Technology Act,” news agency PTI reported.
The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by law student Shreya Singhal who sought an amendment in Section 66A of the Act after two girls – Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan – were arrested in Palghar in Maharashtra’s Thane district.
While one posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s death, the other ‘liked’ it.
In the wake of numerous complaints of harassment and arrests, the apex court on 16 May 2013 came out with an advisory that a person, accused of posting objectionable comments on social networking sites, cannot be arrested without police getting permission from senior officers like an IG or DCP.
(With inputs from PTI)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)