Fake News As Threat To Public Order
1. Understanding Fake News
Fake news refers to false or misleading information presented as news, often with the intent to deceive.
It can be spread via social media, messaging platforms, or traditional media.
Fake news can inflame communal tensions, spread panic, incite violence, or disrupt public order.
2. Public Order and Its Legal Importance
Public order involves the normal functioning of society without disruption from violence, riots, or disturbances.
The Indian Constitution (Article 19(2)) allows reasonable restrictions on free speech in the interest of public order.
Fake news can jeopardize public order by triggering communal riots, mob violence, panic, or mistrust in authorities.
3. Relevant Legal Provisions
Section 153A IPC: Promoting enmity between different groups.
Section 505 IPC: Statements creating or promoting public mischief.
Section 66A of IT Act (now struck down): Sending offensive messages through communication service.
Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000: Provisions to curb the spread of false information.
Section 295A IPC: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
Important Case Laws on Fake News and Public Order
1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1
Facts: Challenge to Section 66A of IT Act, which criminalized offensive messages online.
Holding: Supreme Court struck down Section 66A for being vague and overbroad but upheld that reasonable restrictions on free speech to protect public order are valid.
Significance: Clarified that free speech does not protect fake news that threatens public order.
2. In Re: Explosive Materials, AIR 1954 SC 250
Facts: Case relating to seditious publications promoting violence.
Holding: The Court held that speech or publications intended to incite violence or disturb public order are not protected.
Principle: Fake news inciting violence or unrest can be restrained to maintain public order.
3. S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram, AIR 1989 SC 1039
Facts: Banning of a film that could disrupt public order.
Holding: Court held that free speech can be restricted if the speech creates a clear and present danger to public order.
Relevance: Fake news threatening public order can be curtailed similarly.
4. Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 955
Facts: Case on sedition law and public order.
Holding: The Court held that speech that incites violence or public disorder is punishable.
Significance: Establishes the limit of free speech in the interest of public order.
5. Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637
Facts: Challenge regarding internet shutdown and misinformation in Jammu & Kashmir.
Holding: The Supreme Court emphasized the need to balance free expression and public order, and the role of the government in controlling misinformation.
Significance: Underlined state responsibility in curbing misinformation and fake news that threaten public order.
6. Mohd. Zubair v. Union of India, (Recent)
Facts: Complaint filed against social media posts spreading misinformation and communal disharmony.
Outcome: Courts have consistently taken cognizance of fake news leading to public unrest and have supported actions against such misinformation.
Principle: Fake news fueling communal hatred attracts criminal liability under IPC sections relating to public order.
Summary
Fake news poses a serious threat to public order and the rule of law.
Indian law restricts speech and expression that incites violence, hatred, or panic.
Courts balance freedom of speech with maintenance of public order.
Provisions in IPC and IT Act are invoked to combat fake news.
Judicial pronouncements emphasize the danger of misinformation and authorize reasonable restrictions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments