RIGHT TO INTERNET CASE-“2020”

    RIGHT TO INTERNEThttps://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Finterestingengineering.com%2Ffree-global-internet-access-should-be-a-basic-human-right-experts-conclude&psig=AOvVaw1Q5yAM0Er3T1XYfRPSUVo6&ust=1615023017518000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=2ahUKEwi6j7Db65jvAhV0ALcAHdaDDwsQr4kDegUIARCTAQ

    ANURADHA BHASIN V/S UNION OF INDIA-Internet case

    10th January 2020-information case

    1954- kashmir times a weekly newspaper from kashmir,  publishes  the newspaper in english language.

    1964  kashmir times converted into daily circulation newspaper.

    It started it’s circulation in delhi, himachal pradesh and punjab

    5 august 2019- the president of India passed the constitutional order 272  and from that day onwards  all the constitutional provisions  that applies to all states of India except j&k would  applied to state of Jammu and kashmir as well .

    Through article 367 government of India removed article 370 and 35a that gives special privileges to state of Jammu and kashmir.

    RESTRICTION IMPOSED ON VALLEY- internet case

    The Jammu and kashmir valley prone to frequent terrorist attacks.

    Due to this reason all the internet communication services got expelled due to announcement.

    Due to no internet network in the valley the daily newspaper kashmir times could not circulate and print the newspaper on daily basis.

    The kashmir times newspaper faces loss of business and competition in market.

    For 2 months from 5 august 2019 to 10 October 2019 the newspaper services could not be active because of no internet networks.

    The other newspaper to faces a great set back in business activities.

    CASE PETITION- internet case

    Kashmir times newspaper executive editor- Anuradha Bhasin filed the petition in supreme court. Mrs. Vrinda grover acts as counsel for petitioner.

    Along with anuradha bhasin, gulam nabi azad filed the writ petition under article 32 of constitution.

    The kashmir times newspaper faces loss of business and competition in market.

    writ on behalf of Gulam Navi Azad

    On 16th September 2019 the court gave orders  on certain matters-

    The petitioner allowed visiting his home and family members in Srinagar, Anantnag and Jammu.

    The petitioner was not allowed to conduct any political rallies or political agenda during any visit (as the petitioner came from a political background).

    Section 144 of C.R.P.C

    Under section 144 of C.R.P.C- the district magistrate or S.D.M have power to impose restriction in case of nuisance or violence.

    In the present case, the imposition of section 144 could be a ground of putting  all the communication networks  unconnected to general public of Jammu kashmir.

    Section 144 in kashmir valley was repeatedly imposed by the authority in that area.

    All types of telecommunication activities were disabled in Jammu and kashmir for a particular period of time.

    Argument raised by kapil sibal, senior counsel on behalf of gulam navi azad,

    section 144  cannot be applied to general public could only pe applied to the people or group who tries  to distract  the peace and harmony of society.

    contention on behalf of vrinda grover

    The restriction imposed through section 144 brings a halt to print media.

    Restriction on internet services, infringement of fundamental rights including the article 19(1)(a) and article 19(1)(g) that empowers the citizen to right to speech and right to profession.

    Indian telegram act,1885 consist of section 5 that contains the procedure of suspension of internet services during the state war.

    Temporary suspension of telecom services (public emergency or public services) rules, 2017 mentioned in telegram act, 1885 is of temporary nature or for a short period of  time.

    The orders to suspend communication services is for an indefinite time period which do not match with the compliances mentioned in telegram act,1885.

    Argument on orders

    The solicitor  from the side of court  tushar mehta told  the court ,that  the  orders are privileged orders  and  cannot subject  to presentation  in court.

    Whereas the  argument from the  side of kapil sibal  on behalf of petitioner gulam navi  azad  was  that no order can be marked as privilege order , so it must be presentable  in front of bench and court.

    JUDGMENT- internet case

    The orders passed under section 144 of C.R.P.C  must be submitted before  the court, so  that  proper examination or observation can  be made from orders.

    Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) –article 19(1)(a) freedom of speech  and expression and  19(1)(g) provides right to practice profession, would include right  to internet under this article.

    The reasonable restriction imposed under article 19(2) on 19(1)(a) and 19(6) on 19(1)(g) will continue  to impose restriction.

    The use of section 144 of C.R.P.C  in reparative manner was  abuse of inherent power.

    If any such misuse happens in future, the section under C.R.P.C, 482.has the inherent power to give privilege to any people that takes the matter in high court.

    Telegraph act is not complete in itself there is a need to make alteration in 2017 rule and contain the time duration for suspension of internet networks

    Court assigned review committee to take decision regarding the time duration of internet services remain close during state war.

     After this  the restriction  imposed on Kashmir people would removed after checking the reasonable conditions.

    The restriction imposed on internet services removed from Kashmir valley after the judgment passed on 10 January, 2020.

    the right to information is fundamental right as per the constitution of India, NO such right can be infringed from the public during time of restriction imposed.

    conclusion

    telephone, mobile phones and internet has became a very crucial part in individual’s life. In todays world everyone need internet to search world wide news in one single tab. If restriction imposed by Government on the right to use internet.

    the decision of Apex court for imposing restriction on central government for imposing the section 144 of Cr.P.C and to put restriction on the use of excessive right over any people of India, over a long period of time is not acceptable by Apex court-As every person has right to access internet.

    BIBLIOGRAPHY

    Source-https://Indiankanoon.org/

    http://www.kashmirtimes.com/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Times

    INTERNAL LINKS-

    Hindu Marriage Act- https://legalacharya.com/lawoftheland/hindu-marriage-01-legal-achaya/