Delhi High Court PIL Challenges Internet Shutdown Near Jantar Mantar

A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Delhi High Court, challenging the Union Ministry of Home Affairs' orders to suspend mobile internet services in and around Jantar Mantar. The suspension orders were issued during the ongoing student protests over alleged irregularities in the NEET examination.

The petition, filed by Software Freedom Law Centre, India (SFLC.in), seeks quashing of six suspension orders issued between July 17 and July 23. It also seeks directions requiring authorities to publish all future internet suspension orders before or at the same time as they come into effect.

The matter was mentioned for urgent hearing before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves. However, the petition could not be listed due to defects in the filing.

According to the PIL, the MHA suspended mobile internet services within a 1.5-kilometre radius of Jantar Mantar by invoking Section 20(2)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, along with the Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024. The petition argues that the suspension orders merely repeated the statutory expressions 'public emergency' and 'public safety' without placing any objective material on record to justify the restrictions.

The petition contends that the orders do not explain why a blanket internet shutdown was necessary, nor do they demonstrate necessity, proportionality or consideration of less restrictive alternatives, as required under the law.

The PIL also raises concerns over the lack of transparency in the issuance of internet shutdown orders. It states that affected persons cannot effectively challenge such restrictions if the orders are not made public in time, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India.

The petition further submits that the authorities failed to consider less restrictive measures such as ordinary policing, crowd-control arrangements or targeted enforcement before resorting to an internet shutdown. It also alleges that the suspension orders were issued by an under-secretary, who may not be the competent authority to issue such orders.

The issue of internet shutdowns has been a contentious one, with many arguing that it is a violation of fundamental rights. The PIL seeks to address this issue and ensure that the authorities are held accountable for their actions.

In recent times, there have been several instances of internet shutdowns in India, often citing public safety and national security concerns. However, many have questioned the legality and proportionality of such measures.

The Delhi High Court's decision on this PIL will be closely watched, as it has the potential to set a precedent for future cases involving internet shutdowns. The court's ruling will likely have significant implications for the rights of citizens and the powers of the authorities to restrict internet services.

The PIL is a significant development in the ongoing debate over internet shutdowns in India. It highlights the need for greater transparency and accountability in the issuance of such orders and the importance of protecting fundamental rights in the digital age.

As the case progresses, it will be important to monitor the developments and see how the court rules on the issue. The outcome will likely have far-reaching consequences for the future of internet freedom in India.

In conclusion, the PIL filed in the Delhi High Court challenging the internet shutdown near Jantar Mantar is a significant step towards ensuring that the authorities are held accountable for their actions. The court's decision will likely have significant implications for the rights of citizens and the powers of the authorities to restrict internet services.