Section 66A: When police failed to implement a Supreme Court order

New Delhi, July 05: The Supreme Court on Monday expressed dismay over more than 745 cases being tried under the Section 66A of the Information Technology (IT) Act that are still pending before courts in 11 states, despite it being declared as unconstitutional six years ago.

The top court was hearing a plea claiming that prosecution under the scrapped law continued to be in use not only within police stations, but also in cases before trial courts across India.

Raising the concern, the plea said that, in some cases, trial courts went ahead with framing charges under the defunct IT provision, even after taking cognisance of the court's 2015 judgment.

Justice Nariman remarked, "Amazing. What is going on is terrible. Even if it is struck down by the Division Bench, Section 66A is still there."

Citing findings of the Zombie Tracker Website, the plea said, as on March 10, 2021, around 745 cases are still pending and active before the districts courts wherein accused are charged under Section 66 A of IT Act.

So, what is Section 66 A?

Reaffirming the importance of freedom of speech and expression, the apex court declared the draconian Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2010 unconstitutional for excessively and disproportionately invading the right of free speech and expression.

In its 2015 judgment, the Supreme Court in the Shreya Singhal vs Union of India case held the law as arbitrary and struck it down.

Section 66A of the IT Act punished online communication considered as "grossly offensive, menacing" that caused "annoyance, inconvenience, injured, intimidated or caused enmity and hatred".

Besides, Section 66A made it punishable to send an 'electronic mail message' for the purpose of causing annoyance, or inconvenience, or to deceive or to mislead the recipient about the origin of the message.

The Supreme Court judgement to struck down Section 66A of the IT Act was a significant decision in protecting online free speech against arbitrary restrictions. However, six years down the line since the judgment, the act is still being used to punish people.

11 states where the defunct law is still being implemented

Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Delhi, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal.

Few examples...

In February 2020, a guest lecturer at a college in Assam, was charged, arrested and later sent to judicial custody for posting derogatory remarks against the BJP, the RSS, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and 'Sanatan dharma'.

A court in Karnataka continued to hear a case registered under section 295A of IPC (hurting religious feelings) and section 66A of the IT Act, ignoring the SC verdict. The matter finally ended in the acquittal of the accused only on 6 January 2021.

A West Bengal court gave directions to the police to investigate a matter under Section 66A in an FIR registered under Sections 500 (defamation) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the IPC.

What should be done

• The government should issue necessary advisories with immediate effect to all States/ UTs and through them to all police stations.
• Wide publicity should be given on both Print and Electronic media.
• Strict action must be taken against the erring police personnel.
• The government must make sure that the public at large does not live in fear.