Bombay High Court Judge Opines Against IT Amendment Rules In Kunal Kamra Case

Earlier in the proceedings, the Bombay High Court had declined to stay the establishment of fact-checking units while it heard the case.

File photo of Bombay High Court. While hearing Kunal Kamra case, the Bombay High Court said it views the amendments as against constitutional rights, which do not satisfy the test of proportionality. (Image Source: Vijay Sartape/NDTV Profit)

The Bombay High Court on Friday opined against the establishment of fact-checking units in a case filed by comedian Kunal Kamra and others against the new amendments to the Information Technology Act. The high court said it views the amendments as against constitutional rights, which do not satisfy the test of proportionality.

The matter has been sent back to the division bench to be decided accordingly.

The case was being heard by a tiebreaker judge, Justice AS Chandurkar. At this stage, the state had presented its side, with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta making submissions.

Solicitor General Mehta had explained that if a fact-check unit identified content as fake and the intermediary failed to remove it, the intermediary could add a disclaimer to inform users. If neither action was taken, the aggrieved party could approach the court, where the defence would have the opportunity to argue the content's accuracy.

Mehta mentioned before the court that fact-checking was a common practice in private companies and argued that the government should also have the authority to conduct such reviews.

He had further clarified that the government could only label content as fake or misleading when it related to government business, but the intermediary held the final decision on whether to take action.

Petitioners had previously argued that the amendment had a chilling effect on users' freedom of expression, causing intermediaries to remove content to protect themselves, even when the content aligned with user interests.

Earlier in the proceedings, the Bombay High Court had declined to stay the establishment of fact-checking units while it heard the case. The court had found no conclusive argument against the amendment in its initial review, issuing a temporary order.

The complexity of the case had been compounded when a division bench delivered a split verdict on the challenge on Jan. 31, adding the requirement of a third judge's opinion.

Also Read: Kunal Kamra Moves Supreme Court Seeking Stay On Constitution Of Fact Check Units

Watch LIVE TV , Get Stock Market Updates, Top Business , IPO and Latest News on NDTV Profit.
WRITTEN BY
Charu Singh
Charu Singh, a correspondent at NDTV Profit, leverages her legal education ... more
GET REGULAR UPDATES