The Bombay High Court has struck down the central government’s initiative to establish a Fact-Checking Unit (FCU) under the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2023, following a petition from stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra. Justice AS Chandurkar ruled that the proposed amendments infringed upon Articles 14 and 19 of the Indian Constitution, which safeguard the rights to equality and freedom of speech, expression, and profession.
The court criticized the vague terminology used in the rules, particularly the terms “fake, false, and misleading,” which lacked clear definitions. Justice Chandurkar emphasized that these ambiguities rendered the rules unconstitutional and could lead to arbitrary enforcement by the government.
This ruling comes after a split verdict earlier in January, where Justice Gautam Patel had opposed the rules, describing them as a form of censorship, while Justice Neela Gokhale had supported them, claiming they did not suppress free speech. The case was escalated to a third judge due to this division.
In March, the Supreme Court intervened, temporarily halting a government notification related to the FCU’s operational status until the Bombay High Court made its decision regarding the amendments’ constitutionality. Petitioners, including Kamra, expressed concerns that the rules would impose unreasonable restrictions on free speech and could enable government-controlled censorship. They argued that such regulations would grant the state unchecked power to determine what constitutes truthful content online, effectively making the government the “prosecutor, judge, and executioner” in matters of online truth.
The ruling has significant implications for digital rights and free expression in India, reflecting ongoing tensions between government regulations and individual liberties in the digital age.