{"id":62799,"date":"2015-03-24T05:53:03","date_gmt":"2015-03-24T09:53:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom-of-speech-online-sc-verdict-on-section-66a-today\/"},"modified":"2015-03-24T05:53:03","modified_gmt":"2015-03-24T09:53:03","slug":"freedom-of-speech-online-sc-verdict-on-section-66a-today","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom-of-speech\/freedom-of-speech-online-sc-verdict-on-section-66a-today\/","title":{"rendered":"Freedom of Speech online: SC verdict on Section 66A Today"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    New Delhi: The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce    today its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging    constitutional validity of certain sections of the cyber law    including a provision under which a person can be arrested for    allegedly posting \"offensive\" contents on websites.  <\/p>\n<p>    A bench of justices J Chelameswar and R F Nariman had on    February 26 reserved its judgement after Government concluded    its arguments contending that section 66A of the Information    Technology Act cannot be \"quashed\" merely because of the    possibility of its \"abuse\".  <\/p>\n<p>      Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had said that the      Government did not want to curtail the freedom of speech and      expression at all which is enshrined in the Constitution, but      the vast cyber world could not be allowed to remain      unregulated.    <\/p>\n<p>      However, the court had said that terms like 'illegal',      'grossly offensive' and 'menacing character' were vague      expressions and these words were likely to be misunderstood      and abused.    <\/p>\n<p>      Some of the petitions seek setting aside of section 66A of      the Information Technology Act which empowers police to      arrest a person for allegedly posting offensive materials on      social networking sites.    <\/p>\n<p>      The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by a law student      Shreya Singhal, who sought amendment in Section 66A of the      Act, after two girls -- Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan --      were arrested in Palghar in Thane district as one of them      posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following      Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray's death and the other 'liked'      it.    <\/p>\n<p>      The apex court had on May 16, 2013, come out with an advisory      that a person, accused of posting objectionable comments on      social networking sites, cannot be arrested without police      getting permission from senior officers like IG or DCP.    <\/p>\n<p>      The direction had come in the wake of numerous complaints of      harassment and arrests, sparking public outrage.    <\/p>\n<p>      It had, however, refused to pass an interim order for a      blanket ban on the arrest of such persons across the country.    <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>More here:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.sify.com\/news\/freedom-of-speech-online-sc-verdict-on-section-66a-today-news-national-pdxuEngiaihbe.html\/RK=0\/RS=hev1K_WurFoSrCespCiWUL3eauI-\" title=\"Freedom of Speech online: SC verdict on Section 66A Today\">Freedom of Speech online: SC verdict on Section 66A Today<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> New Delhi: The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce today its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging constitutional validity of certain sections of the cyber law including a provision under which a person can be arrested for allegedly posting \"offensive\" contents on websites.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom-of-speech\/freedom-of-speech-online-sc-verdict-on-section-66a-today\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[162383],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62799","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-freedom-of-speech"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62799"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=62799"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62799\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62799"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62799"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62799"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}