Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Plea Challenging Frequent Internet Shutdowns In Different States

The Supreme Court agreed to list a petition filed by Software Freedom Law Centre, India (SFLC) challenging Internet Shutdowns in various states across the country. The matter was listed before a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala. 

At the outset, the counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue of internet shut downs was a pan Indian concern. He gave an example of internet being shut down owing to an examination being conducted in Rajasthan. It may be noted that the Supreme Court had earlier refused to entertain a petition which was challenging internet shut downs in Rajasthan on the ground that the petitioner could approach the Rajasthan High Court under Article 226. 

When the petitioner in the present case highlighted the internet shutdown in the State of Rajasthan, the bench expressed its disinclination towards entertaining the petition stating that it could be taken up before the High Court. Differentiating the present petition from the earlier petition challenging internet shut down specifically in the state of Rajasthan, the counsel for petitioner submitted –

"The reason why we stand on a different footing is because the earlier petition was not pan India."

Justice PS Narasimha was not convinced entirely and said – 

"In earlier petitions too, we asked the parties to go to the High Court because in the High Court they would be able to interact with the parties and see what the reason for shutting down the Internet was. It is not happening in one go over the country. People have actually approached us. We have asked him to go back to the High Court. Similarly, you too can go to the High Court and High Court will hear the matter."

However, the petitioner, in order to persuade the bench to take the matter said–

"These particular states, the states that we have impleaded – West Bengal, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Arunachal Pradesh – they have a recurrent issue of imposing internet shut downs when it comes to cheating in exams. The point of us coming to the Supreme Court is so that pan India directions can be issued. Counter affidavit was also filed by the Union."

When CJI DY Chandrachud asked the counsel if there was a standard procedure or rules which were followed for internet shut downs, he informed the bench that as per the counter affidavit filed by the Ministry of Communication, Suspension Rules were applicable in such cases.

The bench finally agreed to keep the matter since it concerned a pan-India issue and listed it after three weeks on a non-miscellaneous day. 

Case Title: Software Freedom Law Centre, India v. State of Arunachal Pradesh And Ors. WP(C) No. 314/2022 PIL