AGIJ Promotion Of Nineteenonea Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
In the High Court of Bombay
W.P. (L.) 14172 of 2021
Before Justice G.S. Kulkani
Decided on August 14, 2021

Relevancy of the case: Constitutional validity of Rules 7, 9, 14, and 16 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Rule 7, 9, 14, 16)
• The Constitution of India, 1950 (Article 14, 19(1)(g), 19(1)(a))
• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 69A)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioners were aggrieved by the introduction of the IT Rules, 2021.
• They claimed that the rules contained therein violated their fundamental rights.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel argued that the Rules 9, 14, 16 go beyond the reasonable restrictions mentioned in Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India. Moreover, a fear of punishment under the IT Rules 2021 is present.
• The counsel further submits that the IT Rules, 2021 go beyond the scope of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. These rules impose mass censorship, which cannot be allowed. Also, the counsel prayed for a stay on Rule 7.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that there is no urgency to stay the IT Rules, 2021. Secondly, the petitioners have faced no negative impact. The court must reject the petitioner’s submissions since there is no cause of action due to the IT Rules, 2021.

Opinion of the Bench

• There is no urgency for staying Rule 14 since the authorities have yet to form the inter-departmental inquiry.
• The bench also stated that the petitioners were not aggrieved by Rule 16. Thus, the prayer shall be rejected.
• The Court held that Rule 9 infringes the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).

Final Decision

• The bench rejected the petitioners’ prayers and refused to stay Rules 14 and 16.
• The Bench, however, decided to stay the operation of Rules 9(1) and 9(3).

Marc Pereira, an undergraduate student at Rizvi Law College, Mumbai, prepared this case summary during his internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2022.