Views : What a great Victory ...!! I don't know how to Congratulates Supreme Court .
The real law makers are the Supreme Court. When Parliament makes senseless laws ,then the only hope is at Supreme Court. The law makers are doing political games instead of making better laws.
Lot of laws are still existing -Including 498A- which making hell to People life for years.
Wherever and whenever the law makers fails ,there the Supreme Court wins.
NDTV News:
Freedom of Speech Online: Section 66A is
Struck Down by Supreme Court
All India | Edited by Amit Chaturvedi | Updated: March 24, 2015 11:01 IST
Representational image
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has scrapped a contentious law that was seen as a major infringement of the freedom of speech online. Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, introduced in 2000, has been declared unconstitutional today.
The law had been challenged first by a law student named Shreya Singhal after two young women were arrested in 2012 for posting comments critical of the total shutdown in Mumbai after the death of Bal Thackeray, the Shiv Sena chief.
Critics of the law said it was misused by political parties to target their opponents and dissidence. The previous government, headed by the Congress, said that the law was necessary to combat abuse and defamation on the internet. The new BJP government also defended the law in court.
Broadly, the contention by most of the petitioners was that Section 66A is vague and allows the police arbitrary interpretation and misuse of the law.
Section 66A reads: "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."
The group that challenged the law in the Supreme Court expanded to include the NGO Common Cause and Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen.
The law had been challenged first by a law student named Shreya Singhal after two young women were arrested in 2012 for posting comments critical of the total shutdown in Mumbai after the death of Bal Thackeray, the Shiv Sena chief.
Related
Broadly, the contention by most of the petitioners was that Section 66A is vague and allows the police arbitrary interpretation and misuse of the law.
Section 66A reads: "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."
The group that challenged the law in the Supreme Court expanded to include the NGO Common Cause and Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen.
No comments:
Post a Comment