New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to all
states and UTs on registration of cases under Section 66A of the IT Act, which
was quashed by the court in 2015. A notice has also been issued to the
Registrar-General of all High Courts and responses have been sought within four
weeks.
“The judiciary (aspect) we
will look into separately... (and) as this matter pertains to not only courts
but also police, (let) notice be issued to all states and Union Territories,” a
bench of Justices RF Nariman and BR Gavai said.
“This is to be done in a
period of four weeks from today. List matter after four weeks,” the court said.
The court was hearing a plea
by an NGO - the People Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) - seeking a direction
to the centre to advise all police stations against registering FIRs under
Section 66A.
This comes weeks after the
centre told states and UTs not to register cases under the defunct law, and to
instruct their respective police forces that any such case should be withdrawn.
Last month's Home Ministry
notification was prompted after the Supreme Court expressed shock and
displeasure on being told that over 1,000 cases new had been filed under the
scrapped law.
“It is shocking. We will
issue notice,” a three-member bench of Justices Nariman, Gavai and KM Joseph
said. Justice Nariman added: “Amazing. What is going on is terrible.”
The judges also warned of
strict action against officials who continue to use the defunct law.
The petitioner also pointed
out that in February 2019 the Supreme Court had directed that copies of the
judgment scrapping 66A be available to every district court via the concerned
High Court.
At the time, the centre was
also directed to make available copies to Chief Secretaries of all states and
UTs, who were, in turn, ordered to pass on the information to all police
departments.
Section 66A was struck down
on March 24, 2015, after it was challenged by Shreya Singhal, a Mumbai law
student who filed a petition in 2012 after two women were arrested for posting
comments critical of the city's shutdown after the death of Shiv Sena founder
Bal Thackeray.
“Nobody should have fear of
putting up something because of the fear of going to prison,” Ms Singhal said
at the time, adding there were other laws that could be used to counter hate
speech.
Section 66A read: “Any person
who sends by any means of a computer resource any information that is grossly
offensive or has a menacing character; or any information which he knows to be
false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger,
obstruction, insult shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to three years and with fine.”
____________