The biggest public platform, the Internet is utilised for a variety of activities, including conducting business and exchanging data and information. It is a global platform for many kinds of networks. There should be a way to regulate or stop the misuse of a platform that offers so many diverse options and information. The idea of internet filtering was created in order to avoid abuse. The restriction and/or suppression of what may be accessed, seen, and published online is known as censorship on the web. Governments from different nations are mostly in charge of it, although private organisations and people may also carry it out for ethical, religious, or commercial purposes.

The internet is regulated only because it prohibits any type of breakout in society, slander, breach of privacy, etc. The eruption in society might be a political issue, spiritual in nature, or business-wise. The Internet was formerly known colloquially as the “Information Superhighway” because it offered anybody access to an infinite quantity of material that could be obtained. One of the numerous advantages of internet filtering is that it shields kids from pornographic information that is extremely improper for their development as adults that can be found on the internet. The authority’s goal is to try to regulate how much data the country has access to. The Indian Constitution’s Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression to all of its inhabitants. To have the freedom to openly express one’s beliefs and thoughts through words, writing, printing, photographs, or any other medium is known as freedom of speech and expression.

The government can constrain free expression and control internet material for ethical conduct, decent behavior, or public safety under the Information Technology Act of 2000 and its revisions. The government can restrict access to internet content that it believes, among other things, violates India’s sovereignty and integrity by using Section 69A of the IT Act.

Nowadays, there is a wealth of knowledge available on the internet for anybody to access at any time. Information, delivery services at home, and data that is crucial to global corporations may all be found on the web. Older folks can also benefit from the information available on the internet, in addition to youth and adults. Thanks to the internet, people may express their beliefs and points of view on any platform. There is a significant deal of freedom of speech and expression available to everyone. They are free to express their opinions on any subject pertaining to any industry as long as it doesn’t negatively impact someone else’s state of mind or body.



Internet restriction contributes to the elimination of widespread disinformation. Because it’s so easy for others to share their ideas on websites without having the necessary background knowledge, misinformation found online is essentially phone. Internet filtering can aid in reducing the amount of pornographic content available online and trafficking operations. Concerns about privacy have never been higher in the modern day as a result of the prevalence of large businesses looking to get private details about users for their own gain. There’s a website known as the “dark web” where people may sell their personal information that has been pilfered for a fee. The majority of the content on this site includes offensive language, juvenile sexuality, sexual slavery, etc. Their origin may be readily detected and controlled by internet restriction.


One group of individuals gains control over a different category of people—the controllers. An organisation handling restrictions on the web should exist so that reports may be made; otherwise, monopolies will arise. One cannot restrict their opinions or restrict the individual who establishes the guidelines for internet control. The flaw with this type of power is that once a group of individuals has power over another, no one is present to keep an eye on what their actions are or what their moral standards and ideals of governing society are.
The expense of internet restriction is high. It is extremely expensive for the nations that censor the internet to keep it in place. Data is under control. One in four internet users worldwide report often experiencing internet restriction, according to a World Economic Forum poll. Sanctions for conduct on the internet are imposed on a large number of people. People in that country may also be penalised for little behaviours if their government has more stringent regulations regarding internet filtering.


Expressing ideas, thoughts, and pictures on social networking sites proved to be a boon, but some users have been abusing the site. The majority of women who have been subjected to frequent trolling because of their sex, faith, class, or relationship status have been the victims of this abuse. India is experiencing a greater trolling issue than either the US or the UK. Muslim women are targeted by trolls 55% more frequently. One of the “curses” of social networking sites is misleading information. Another outcome of bogus news is mob lynching. People become afraid of it, and the government works hard to stop it from getting worse. Many provisions in the IT Act, particularly those included in Sections 66A, 69A, and 79, may be utilized to restrict data that is accessible online. Significantly, practically all of these cases involve government intervention without any kind of judicial review; in fact, Section 79 of the statute expressly promotes private censorship.

They use a variety of techniques to regulate the internet, such as debunking, educating the public, removing bogus news, etc. Rebuttal essentially refers to a technique for verifying the veracity of false information. The news item in question gets taken down from social media sites if it is shown to be fraudulent. Businesses like Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, and others are under continual pressure to take bogus news off their platforms. WhatsApp made one such attempt when they unveiled the idea of the forwarded message.



One legislative authority that oversees print media activities in India is the Press Council. It was founded in accordance with the 1978 Press Council Act.
Council members include writers, paper owners, and reporters, among other interested parties. Upholding and raising the bar for Indian journalism is its core goal.


In India, cable television networks are governed by the Cable Television Networks Act. It was passed into law in 1995 to regulate the administration and operation of cable television networks. The statute seeks to of consumers and guarantee the caliber of cable television services. It creates a regulatory structure for broadcasters and cable companies. Cable operators are required under the legislation to apply for licenses in order to run their networks. It establishes guidelines for what may be shown on cable TV, such as what can’t be shown that is vulgar or offensive.


Social media sites that are active in India must abide by the New IT Rules, 2021. These guidelines are meant to control user conduct and online content.
Social media companies are required to designate an Indian-based Chief Compliance Officer, Nodal Contact Person, and Grievance Officer. They also need to set up a grievance redressal system so that user concerns may be handled quickly. According to the regulations, platforms must restrict or delete access to illegal information within 36 hours of being notified by the government or by a court order.


The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting’s Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) is a legislative agency that oversees public film exhibitions in accordance with the Cinematograph Act of 1952. In India, only films certified by the Central Board of Film Certification are eligible for public exhibition. The Central Government appoints the Board’s Chairman and non-official members, with its main headquarters located in Mumbai.

An evaluation of the decision to overturn the internet censorship statute

In 2015, a two-judge court rendered a decision that invalidated Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000. The Information Technology Act of 2000’s Section 66A had ambiguous terminology that were being exploited improperly for political and personal gain. This particular portion posed a serious threat to the right to free speech and expression. Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 was overturned in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India on the grounds that it contravened Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution. Citizens utilised the legislation’s ambiguous and expansive interpretation for their particular individual and political ends. Under this contentious law, sending disrespectful remarks, feedback, or postings might have resulted in jail time. The cops utilised it maliciously on several occasions. The president gave his approval to the word. An instance among several others was the arrest of a cartoonist for drawing a caricature of the Bengal Chief Minister. Two teenage girls were detained in 2012 following disapproval of Mumbai’s closure; one of them was detained for just “liking” the post. The constitution was marred by laws of this kind. Indian people were prohibited from disagreeing with or criticising the government because of Section 66A. The two hundred page ruling addresses the problem of internet filtering. The South Asian area has the third largest amount of internet users, around 200 million, yet no suitable legislation has been put in place to prevent online abuse.


There have been numerous highs and lows on the roller coaster journey that is internet censorship. Positives and negatives  have already been covered. The right to free speech and expression is essential to a democracy. The correct amount of balance should be struck between other factors including security, privacy, and freedom of speech. Internet censorship hasn’t been up to par thus far and is woefully insufficient. Businesspeople and politicians have always profited from freedom of speech and expression, whether or not laws are in place. A breach of the right to free speech and expression also occurs when material is blocked for political purposes or when private data is stolen. A sufficiently clear law is needed so that people feel comfortable trusting it with their private data. Citizens’ personal information is frequently taken for purposes such as voting privileges, preferences, etc. The authorities should enact a few adjustments in order to effectively support freedom of speech and expression in this nation.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This field is required.

This field is required.


The following disclaimer governs the use of this website (“Website”) and the services provided by the Law offices of Kr. Vivek Tanwar Advocate & Associates in accordance with the laws of India. By accessing or using this Website, you acknowledge and agree to the terms and conditions stated in this disclaimer.

The information provided on this Website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered as legal advice or relied upon as such. The content of this Website is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and the Law Firm. Any reliance on the information provided on this Website is done at your own risk.

The Law Firm makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information contained on this Website.

The Law Firm disclaims all liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this Website or for any actions taken in reliance on the information provided herein. The information contained in this website, should not be construed as an act of solicitation of work or advertisement in any manner.