SC notice to states, H over Sec 66A of IT Ac
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to all states, Union Territories and high courts on an NGO’S plea that people are still being booked under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act that was scrapped by an apex court verdict in 2015.
A bench of Justices R F Nariman and B R Gavai said that since police is a state subject, it will be better that all states and UTS are made party to the case and “we can pass a comprehensive order so that the matter is settled for once and for all”.
The bench ordered, “As this matter pertains to police and judiciary, in the fitness of things, we issue notice to all states, Union Territories and registrar general of all high courts”.
It said all should respond to the notices within four weeks and directed that details of pleading be also sent with notices to all the parties.
During the hearing, senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for the NGO, ‘People’s Union for Civil Liberties’ (PUCL), said that there are two aspects in this matter, one is police and the other is judiciary where such cases are still being tried.
The bench said it can take care of the judiciary and will issue notice to all the high courts, and listed the matter for further hearing after four weeks.
At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said he received the PUCL rejoinder to the government’s affidavit on Sunday only and he would like to go through it.
On July 5, the top court had said it was “amazing” and “shocking” that people were still being booked under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act that was scrapped by an apex court verdict in 2015.
Under the scrapped section, a person posting offensive messages could be imprisoned for up to three years and also fined.
The top court had issued notice to the Centre on PUCL’S application and told the NGO’S counsel, “Don’t you think this is amazing and shocking? Shreya Singhal judgement is of 2015. It’s really shocking. What is going on is terrible.”
The NGO claimed that despite express directions of the court in 2019 that all state governments should sensitise police personnel about the March 24, 2015 judgement, thousands of cases have been registered under the section. Attorney General K K Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, had earlier said that on perusal of the IT Act it can be seen that section 66A features in it, but in the footnote it is written that the provision has been scrapped. The top court was hearing a fresh application of PUCL saying,
“That, shockingly, despite the order dated February 15, 2019 and steps taken towards compliance thereof, the Applicant discovered that Section 66A of the IT Act has continued to be in use not only within police stations but also in cases before trial courts across India”. The NGO said, “That in spite of the order passed by this Court on February 15, 2019, directing that copies of the judgment of this
Court in Shreya Singha remain available wit high court as well as all trict courts and that th departments in the enti try i.e. all States and UTS sitized about the said ju the facts mentioned abo that not only the invest under Section 66A by th are continuing but eve trial courts”. It sough tion to the Centre to co data/ information re FIRS/ investigations wh tion 66A has been inv well as pendency of cas courts throughout the where proceedings un provision are continuin lation of the 2015 jud On February 15, 2019, court had directed all st ernments to sensitis police personnel ab March 24, 2015 verdic had scrapped Section Information Technolog that people are not unn ily arrested under the down provision.
It also asked all t courts to send the cop verdict to all the trial avoid people being pro under the scrapped pr which provided for jail people who posted of content online.
On January 7, 2019 hearing the applica PUCL, the bench had o that it is shocking that are still being prosecute Section 66A of the IT A after it has been scrappe apex court in 2015.
It had sought respon the Centre and warned cerned officials from them to jail for viola orders.
Terming liberty of t and expression “cardin top court had on Ma 2015, scrapped the pr saying that “the public’s know is directly affected tion 66A of the Infor Technology Act”.