The judgment Shreya Singhal v. Union of India is a landmark Supreme Court of India judgment delivered on March 24, 2015, concerning online free speech. The case originated from the arbitrary arrests of citizens, including two women in Mumbai, under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) for posting comments on social media. This provision, inserted via a 2008 amendment, criminalized sending information that was "grossly offensive" or "menacing" through a communication device, carrying a punishment of up to three years imprisonment. The problem it solved was the "chilling effect" and misuse of a vague and over-broad law that allowed police to arrest individuals for expressing dissenting or inconvenient political opinions.
The Supreme Court, in a two-judge bench comprising Justices J. Chelameswar and R.F. Nariman, struck down Section 66A of the IT Act in its entirety. The ratio of the judgment was that Section 66A was unconstitutional because it violated the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Court held that the section was not saved by the "reasonable restrictions" clause under Article 19(2), as the terms "offensive" and "annoying" were vague and did not fall under the constitutionally permissible grounds for restriction, such as incitement to public disorder.
The judgment also read down Section 79 of the IT Act, clarifying that online intermediaries are only obligated to take down content upon receiving an order from a court or a government authority. While Section 66A was struck down, the constitutionality of Section 69A of the IT Act, which deals with the power of the government to block access to online content, was upheld. Despite the clear ruling, the "dead law" of Section 66A continued to be used to register cases, prompting the Supreme Court to issue further directions in 2022 to ensure all prosecutions under the section are dropped.