New Rules Notified To Make Social Media And OTT Platforms Accountable Are A Dire Necessity
Jharkhand High Court Restrains State From Suspending Internet on Exam Days Without Permission
Background
In recent times, several states in India have been suspending internet services during important examinations (like board exams, competitive exams) citing reasons such as prevention of cheating, misinformation, or law and order concerns.
Jharkhand Government was suspending internet services during exam days without prior permission or clear guidelines. This move impacted not only students but also public at large, affecting fundamental rights like freedom of speech and right to information.
Jharkhand High Court’s Intervention
The Jharkhand High Court intervened by restraining the State government from suspending internet services during examination days unless prior permission is taken from the Court or appropriate authority after proper examination of necessity.
Legal Issues Involved
Whether State can suspend internet services arbitrarily during exams?
Whether suspension without prior permission violates fundamental rights?
What is the scope of judicial oversight in internet suspension orders?
Relevant Constitutional Provisions
Article 19(1)(a): Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression.
Article 19(1)(g): Right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
Article 21: Protection of Life and Personal Liberty (includes the right to access information).
Article 19(2): Reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech for sovereignty, security, public order, etc.
Principles Established by the Court
Internet access is a fundamental necessity in today’s times, akin to the freedom of speech and expression.
Arbitrary or blanket suspension of internet access violates constitutional rights.
Suspension can only be justified if it meets the test of proportionality and necessity.
The State must follow due procedure, provide prior notice, and obtain judicial or appropriate administrative permission.
The suspension order must be specific, limited in time and extent, and not a blanket ban.
Relevant Case Law
1. Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637 (Supreme Court)
The Supreme Court held that internet access is a part of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
Suspension of internet services must comply with the principle of proportionality.
Blanket or indefinite suspension violates fundamental rights.
Any restriction must be reasonable, necessary, and in accordance with the law.
The State must follow due procedure and provide adequate safeguards.
2. Faheema Shirin v. State of Kerala, (2019) 9 SCC 737
The Supreme Court recognized internet as a medium for education and livelihood.
Courts should scrutinize suspension orders strictly.
Internet shutdowns can severely affect the fundamental rights of citizens.
3. PUCL v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 568
Recognized that any restriction on fundamental rights must be reasonable and necessary for public order.
The principle applies to new modes of communication as well.
Significance of the Jharkhand High Court Order
The court balanced the State’s interest in preventing cheating and maintaining order with the citizens’ fundamental rights.
The judgment emphasizes judicial oversight to prevent misuse of power by the State.
Ensures students and others retain access to the internet, which is crucial for education, communication, and information.
Prevents arbitrary internet suspensions, encouraging transparent and reasoned decision-making.
Summary
| Aspect | Jharkhand HC View | Constitutional Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Internet Suspension | Not allowed without prior judicial/authority permission | Article 19(1)(a), Article 21 |
| Grounds for Suspension | Must be necessary, proportional, and limited | Article 19(2) restrictions |
| Procedure | Prior notice and due process mandatory | Rule of law and natural justice principles |
| Impact | Protects freedom of speech, education, livelihood | Right to access information |
Conclusion
The Jharkhand High Court’s order is a landmark step in protecting digital rights and fundamental freedoms in the internet age. It reaffirms that internet access is integral to constitutional freedoms and State actions to suspend it must be judicially scrutinized, reasonable, and justified.
This ruling aligns with Supreme Court judgments emphasizing the importance of balancing state interests and individual rights in digital governance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments