Case 19 of 30 in Law Easy's Media Law series. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, Supreme Court of India, decided 2015.
FACTS
Section 66A of the Information Technology Act punished sending online messages that were grossly offensive or menacing, or sent to cause annoyance or inconvenience. Its words were challenged as vague and capable of catching innocent speech.
WHAT THE COURT HELD
In 2015 the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A. The words were so vague that people could not know what speech was criminal, and they had a chilling effect, frightening people into silence. Discussion and even advocacy of an unpopular cause is protected, and speech can be restricted only when it reaches the level of incitement.
EXAM POINT
Remember the three keywords: vagueness, overbreadth and chilling effect.
PREVIOUS CASE: Sahara India Real Estate Corporation v. Securities and Exchange Board of India -
https://youtu.be/BW4vAx8fhCA
NEXT CASE: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India -
https://youtu.be/3dNZMVTm_6E
FULL PLAYLIST (all 30 cases in order):
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLY-t71WbMh6k
COMPLETE LECTURE (all 30 cases, 1 hour 52 minutes):
https://youtu.be/8AFvktrLPM4
Made for LL.B. students and for CLAT PG, UGC NET Law and judiciary exam preparation. Subscribe to Law Easy for the full law course. Notes:
https://www.thelaweasy.com
#MediaLaw #Section66A #LawEasy