Journalist Sanjay Sharma challenges IT Blocking Rules in SC over YouTube ban citing violation of freedom of speech and lack of due process.
4PM SANJAY SHARMA MOVED TO SUPREME COURT
CASE IN NEWS
Sanjay Sharma, Editor-in-Chief of the YouTube channel ‘4PM’, has approached the Supreme Court challenging the blocking of his channel under IT Blocking Rules, 2009, citing a violation of his fundamental rights.
CASE OVERVIEW
The channel was blocked allegedly on grounds of national security and public order. Sharma claims there was no notice, hearing, or disclosure of the order. He seeks judicial review of Rules 8, 9, and 16 of the Blocking Rules framed under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000.
KEY ASPECT
- The petition emphasizes the absence of procedural safeguards and transparency.
- The plea challenges executive power being used to restrict journalistic content without due process.
LEGAL INSIGHTS
- Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech; any restriction must be reasonable and justifiable.
- Rule 16’s confidentiality clause conflicts with the principles laid out in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.
- The plea seeks reading down of vague terms to ensure accountability.
IMPACT
- The case could lead to significant reforms in content takedown procedures.
- A favorable judgment may limit arbitrary online censorship by the government.
CONCLUSION
This case highlights the tension between digital governance and free speech, urging the judiciary to ensure that constitutional protections are not overridden by executive opacity.
SOURCE: X: Sanjay Sharma
