The impugned rule does not violate constitutional rights as it aims to curb misinformation while preserving the right to free speech, establishing clear parameters around false content concerning government business.

JUDGMENT :

Neela Gokhale, J.

I have received the draft judgment prepared by my esteemed brother Gautam Patel J. I have perused the draft, which is undoubtedly most erudite and articulate. With profound respect to my learned brother, I find myself unable to, however, concur with his reasoning and conclusion save as will be made clear. Hence the following judgment.

OVERVIEW

1. This batch of Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raises important and far-reaching questions relatable primarily to the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution of India. The Petitioners specifically assail the constitutional validity of Rule 3(i) (II)(A) and (C) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2023 which amend Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules 2021 (“the impugned Rule”) as being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and Section 79 and Section 87 (2)(z) and (zg) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”). The thrust of the challenge is that the impugned Rule has a ‘chilling effect’ upon the freedom of speech and expression of the Petitioners, guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India. The Petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned Rule vesting authority in a Fact Check Unit (“FCU”) to be notified by the Government to identify the veracity or otherwise of ‘information’, thereby alleging the Government to be the sole arbiter of truth in respect of any business related to itself.

ABOUT THE PARTIES

2. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.9792 of 2023 professes to be a comedian, whose primary form of comedy is social and political satire. He hosts web-series where he engages in discussions with prominent activists, political leaders, and journalists on various aspects of Indian socio-political landscape. The Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No.14955 of 2023 is a society asserting to be a not-for-profit organization. As per this Petitioner, the professional guild founded in 1978 in the aftermath of the emergency era attack on press freedom, has undertaken the responsibility and duty to safeguard the freedom of the fourth estate of democracy and has time and again opposed threats to media freedom from State as well as non-State actors. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.7953 of 2023 is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 which claims to comprise 40 magazine publishers with more than 300 publications across 10 languages reaching readers across print, digital and social media. Several members of this Petitioner offer digital exclusive content on the websites and social media accounts which, according to this Petitioner, is not available in the print edition of their publications. The Respondents are the Union of India through its Ministries concerned.

FACTS OF THE CASE

3. The challenge to the impugned Rule in all these petitions generally being on similar grounds, the facts are being set out collectively. The Parliament enacted the Information Technology Act in the year 2000. The Statement and Objects of the Act as sta