echo ''; Clamorworld » In everyday life every one of us comes across various experiences, incidents which we either don’t share with anyone or share with family members and friends. Print media, electronic media and various medium shows the news, but its ends up showing one sided of the story. We never come to know the other side of story. With so much happening every day, every second across our neighborhood, society, and world it’s difficult for the news media to cover all the news. Many times we have felt wish we could share our voice, opinion, thoughts with the world. Many a times we have felt the frustration, anger and helplessness for not being able to do anything about an incident. Have you ever felt, for a good cause, you need support, but don’t know how to garner the support and attention. So, now you have an option “www.Clamorworld.com“. This is a platform to share everything you want to. A website 100% runs by the people for the people. The world is waiting to listen to your voice, the voice which has kept you suppressed so far. If you do not want to share the incident, event personally, please send it to us at contact@clamorworld.com, and we will share it on your behalf and assure to keep your name confidential. Let’s make this world a peaceful and a happy place to live. » Now no arrests for objectionable posts on FB as SC scraps Section 66A

Now no arrests for objectionable posts on FB as SC scraps Section 66A

 

The Supreme Court today struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act holding it violative of Article 19(1)a of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech.

 

“Section 66A of the IT Act is struck down in its entirety…,” said the apex court bench of Justice J Chelameswar and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman.

 

“Our Constitution provides for liberty of thought, expression and belief. In a democracy, these values have to be provided within constitutional scheme. The law (Section 66A) is vague in its entirety,” said Justice Nariman pronouncing the judgment.

 

“There is no nexus between public order and discussion or causing annoyance by dissemination of information. Curbs under Section 66A of the IT Act infringes on the public right to know.”

 

The apex court order came on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of 66A of the IT Act on the grounds of its vague and ambiguous and was being misused by the law enforcing authorities.

 

The court was moved by one Shreya Singhal in 2012 following the arrest of two girls — Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan — for posting comments critical of the Mumbai shutdown following the death of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray.

 

The hearing saw NGOs Common Cause, People Union for Civil Liberty and individuals including self-exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen joining the challenge which saw a repeat hearing after an earlier hearing by a bench of Justice J Chelameswar and Justice SA Bobde remained inconclusive.

 

Broadly, the contention by most of the petitioners was that Section 66A was vague which gave ample scope for an arbitrary interpretation and misuse of the provision by police.

 

Section 66A reads: “Any person who sends by any means of a computer resource any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character; or any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.”

Leave a reply