THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000

Case law

1.       Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)

Supreme Court of India - Section 66A – Constitutionality - The Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional for being vague, overbroad, and violative of Article 19(1)(a). It held that expressions like “annoying”, “inconvenient” etc. are undefined and create chilling effect on free speech. The provision failed the test of reasonable restriction under Article 19(2).

2.       Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)

Supreme Court of India - Section 65B IEA (SEC 63 BSA) Admissibility of electronic evidence - The Court held that electronic records are admissible only if accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B(4). Oral evidence or secondary evidence is not sufficient without such certificate. This judgment made Section 65B mandatory for admissibility.

3.       Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)

Supreme Court of India - Section 65B IEA (SEC 63 BSA) clarification - The Court reaffirmed Anvar P.V. and held that Section 65B IEA (SEC 63 BSA) certificate is mandatory unless the original device is produced. It clarified that certificate can be produced at a later stage if not initially filed, ensuring procedural flexibility without diluting requirement.

4.       Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) Google India Pvt. Ltd. v. Visaka Industries (2020)

Supreme Court of India - Section 65B IEA (SEC 63 BSA) relaxation (overruled later) - The Court earlier held that certificate requirement is procedural and can be relaxed when party does not possess device. However, this view was later overruled in Arjun Panditrao case, restoring strict compliance.

5.       K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)

Supreme Court of India - Privacy & data protection (IT framework relevance) - The Court recognized right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21. It emphasized informational privacy and necessity of data protection regime, directly impacting interpretation of IT Act provisions dealing with data and surveillance.

6.       People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India (1997)

Supreme Court of India - Telephone tapping (pre-IT but relevant) - The Court laid down procedural safeguards against arbitrary interception of communication, forming basis for later IT Act rules on interception and monitoring under Section 69.

7.       CBI v. Arif Azim (Sony Sambandh Case) (2003)

Supreme Court of India - Online fraud & jurisdiction - The Court dealt with India’s first cyber fraud case and held that traditional criminal law principles apply to cyber offences. It recognized validity of electronic transactions and emphasized need for proper investigation in cyber crimes.

8.       Avnish Bajaj v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2008)

Supreme Court of India - Intermediary liability - The Court examined liability of online marketplace (Bazee.com case) and held that intermediaries may be liable if they have knowledge and fail to act. It paved way for safe harbour interpretation under Section 79.

9.       Google India Pvt. Ltd. v. Visaka Industries (2020)

Supreme Court of India - Section 79 – Intermediary liability - The Court held that intermediaries cannot claim automatic immunity under Section 79 unless they satisfy due diligence requirements and act upon receiving actual knowledge of unlawful content.

10.   Sabu Mathew George v. Union of India (2018)

Supreme Court of India - Intermediary responsibility (search engines) - The Court directed search engines like Google, Yahoo, Microsoft to proactively block content violating law (PCPNDT Act). It emphasized stricter responsibility of intermediaries in regulating unlawful online content.

11.   Faheema Shirin v. State of Kerala (2019)

Supreme Court (principle later endorsed) - Right to internet access - The Court recognized right to access internet as part of right to education and privacy under Article 21, highlighting importance of digital access under IT regime.

12.   Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020)

Supreme Court of India - Internet shutdowns & freedom of speech - The Court held that freedom of speech and trade through internet is protected under Article 19. Internet shutdown orders must be proportionate, temporary, and subject to judicial review.

13.   Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar) v. Union of India (2018)

Supreme Court of India - Data protection & Aadhaar - The Court upheld Aadhaar with restrictions and emphasized data minimization, purpose limitation, and security safeguards—principles crucial for IT Act interpretation.

14.   Kunal Kamra v. Union of India (2024)

IT Rules, 2023 (under IT Act – intermediary regulation) - The Supreme Court upheld the challenge to the Government’s Fact Check Unit (FCU) rules (through final resolution of split verdict). It held that vague and overbroad powers to label online content as “fake” violate Articles 14 and 19(1)(a). The Court emphasized that executive-controlled censorship without procedural safeguards creates a chilling effect on free speech and exceeds powers under the IT Act.