Latest news with #ITRules
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Justice Chandurkar sworn in as Supreme Court Judge
1 2 Nagpur: Justice Atul Chandurkar was sworn in as a judge of the Supreme Court on Friday morning, alongside Justices NV Anjaria and Vijay Bishnoi, restoring the apex court to its full sanctioned strength of 34 judges. Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai administered the oath of office in a ceremony held at the Supreme Court's extension building in New Delhi. The appointments, notified by the central govt on Thursday, were recommended by the collegium led by CJI Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, JK Maheshwari, and BV Nagarathna on May 26. President Droupadi Murmu formally approved the appointments, clearing the way for the swearing-in ceremony. While Justice Bishnoi took the oath in Hindi, Justices Anjaria and Chandurkar were administered oaths in English. Justice Chandurkar's elevation fills one of the three vacancies created by the recent retirements of former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Abhay S Oka and Hrishikesh Roy. In keeping with tradition, on their first working day, the newly appointed judges joined benches in order of seniority, with Justice Chandurkar sitting alongside Justice Vikram Nath. Born on April 7, 1965, Justice Chandurkar completed his schooling at St Vincent's High School in Pune, followed by higher education at Ness Wadia College and ILS Law College, Pune. He began his legal practice in Mumbai under senior counsel BN Naik on July 21, 1988, later shifting to Nagpur in 1992, where he practised extensively across various courts. Elevated as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court on June 21, 2013, he eventually became the administrative judge of its Nagpur bench. Justice Chandurkar has delivered several notable judgments so far in his career. In June 2024, he led a division bench that upheld a dress code enforced by a Chembur college banning hijabs and other religious identifiers, ruling it did not infringe upon fundamental rights. In September 2024, he concurred with Justice Gautam Patel in striking down the amended IT Rules that empowered the govt's Fact Check Unit, declaring them unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 19. In October 2024, he stayed the Maharashtra govt's attempt to reclaim over 116 acres of industrial land in Kandivali's Charkop area. Most recently, in March 2025, he dismissed a plea by a Dalit PhD student challenging his suspension by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) for alleged misconduct and anti-national activities. Justice Chandurkar also questioned the Maharashtra govt in March over the pending heritage status for Veer Savarkar's residence in Shivaji Park and barred any changes to the property's status until June 13. The same month, he led a bench that ruled compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act should not be reduced by amounts received from Mediclaim or insurance policies. Justice Chandurkar has authored two books on municipal and rent control laws in Maharashtra, underlining his expertise in civil and administrative law. His elevation is seen as a recognition of his deep knowledge and balanced judicial approach. He will have a tenure of four years and ten months and will retire on April 6, 2030. The swearing-in ceremony was attended by lawyers from Nagpur, marking a proud moment for the local bar, which has seen several of its members ascend to the apex court. Justice Chandurkar joins the list of eminent jurists from the Nagpur High Bar Association, including Justices Janardan Mudholkar, Ananda Sen, Vikas Sirpurkar, Sharad Bobde, and Bhushan Gavai. Justice Chandurkar's Significant Judgments: - Upheld dress code ban on hijabs in colleges - Struck down amended IT Rules as unconstitutional - Stayed state's attempt to reclaim industrial land in Mumbai Nagpur Connection: Justice Chandurkar practised law in Nagpur from 1992 Previous Position: Senior judge, Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Delhi High Court Seeks Response on Plea Challenging Notification Empowering Police to Issue Social Media Takedown Notices
New Delhi: Delhi High Court sought the response of LG VK Saxena on a plea challenging a notification issued by him empowering police to issue takedown notices for social media content. A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued a notice to LG and the union ministry of electronics and information technology, asking them to file replies within six weeks. The court listed the matter for further hearing on Sept 17. The bench was hearing a plea filed by the 'Software Freedom Law Center' challenging the legality and constitutional validity of the notification issued by LG that designated Delhi Police as the nodal agency under the Information Technology Rules, 2021, empowering it to issue takedown notices for online content. The notification empowers Delhi Police officers to issue takedown orders to social media companies and other intermediaries to remove illegal content under the Information Technology Act. Advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, appearing for the petitioner, submitted before the court that this designation has no basis in law. Neither Section 79 of the Information Technology Act nor the IT Rules, 2021 confer any authority to appoint such a nodal agency. The petition stated that allowing police officers to unilaterally issue takedown notices, without judicial or independent oversight, opens the door to unchecked censorship and arbitrary restriction of constitutionally protected speech. It added that such a move violates Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and contradicts the landmark judgments of the Supreme Court, which emphasise the need for legal safeguards and proportionality in actions impacting fundamental rights. "The statutory power to block or remove online content is exclusively vested in the central govt under Section 69A of the IT Act, read with the Information Technology Rules, 2009. The impugned notification, by granting these powers to the police, oversteps constitutional and statutory boundaries and is, therefore, ultra vires the parent legislation," the plea said.
India Gazette
4 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
Delhi HC seeks response on challenge to Delhi Police's online content takedown powers
New Delhi [India], May 29 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has issued a notice in response to a plea challenging a notification by Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena that grants the Delhi Police authority to issue takedown orders for online content on social media platforms. A division bench, comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, on Wednesday acknowledged the submission made by the Software Freedom Law Centre ( and sought responses from the LG Office and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), directing that they be submitted within six weeks. SFLC has contested the constitutional validity of the notification, which designates the Delhi Police as the Nodal Agency under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021), enabling it to issue takedown orders for online content. The petition argues that allowing police officers to independently direct content removal, without judicial or external oversight, risks enabling unchecked censorship and arbitrary limitations on constitutionally protected free speech. It was argued that neither the IT Rules, 2021, nor Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act confer any authority for the establishment of a Nodal Agency, Nodal Officer, or any other positions specified in the contested Notification. Section 79 solely provides conditional immunity to intermediaries and delineates their due diligence responsibilities; it does not grant executive power to the State or Union to institute a mechanism for speech regulation or restriction. It was also contended that the authority to restrict access to online content falls exclusively within the purview of Section 69A, alongside the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (referred to as the 'Blocking Rules, 2009'). The Central Government has already exercised its authority to appoint a designated officer for issuing blocking orders through the formal implementation of these rules. The statutory framework does not envisage the establishment of any parallel or supplementary authority, particularly at the direction of a state-level executive. The plea stated that the IT Act does not provide for the creation or operation of a Nodal Agency in the manner proposed by the contested Notification. (ANI)
Hindustan Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC asks LG, Centre to reply to plea on online content takedown notices
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has sought the response of the Lieutenant Governor on a plea challenging a notification issued by him empowering police to issue takedown notices for social media content. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notice to the LG and the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and asked them to file replies within six weeks. The court listed the matter for further hearing on September 17. The bench was hearing a plea filed by Software Freedom Law Center challenging the legality and constitutional validity of the notification issued by the LG that designated Delhi Police as the nodal agency under the Information Technology Rules, 2021, empowering it to issue takedown notices for online content. The notification empowers Delhi Police officers to issue takedown orders to social media companies and other intermediaries to remove illegal content under the Information Technology Act. Advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, representing the petitioner, contended that this designation has no basis in law and neither Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, nor the IT Rules, 2021 confer any authority to appoint such a nodal agency. "The statutory power to block or remove online content is exclusively vested in the Central Government under Section 69A of the IT Act, read with the Information Technology Rules, 2009. The impugned notification, by granting these powers to the police, oversteps constitutional and statutory boundaries and is, therefore, ultra vires the parent legislation," the plea said. It further said that allowing police officers to unilaterally issue takedown notices, without judicial or independent oversight, opens the door to unchecked censorship and arbitrary restriction of constitutionally protected speech. It contended that such a move violates Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and contradicts the landmark judgments of the Supreme Court which emphasise the need for legal safeguards and proportionality in actions impacting fundamental rights.
India Gazette
17-05-2025
- Sport
- India Gazette
Chhattisgarh High Court gives relief to skill gaming platform SportsBaazi
Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) [India], May 17 (ANI): The High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur has granted interim relief to SBN Gaming Network Pvt. Ltd., the operator of SportsBaazi, in response to its legal challenge. The Court issued an interim directive restraining the petitioner from operating its website within Chhattisgarh. The court ordered the platform to be blocked in the state through 'Gio block.' However, SportsBaazi remains permitted to function in other parts of India until the next hearing, said the court. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, presiding over the case, observed that the petitioner's app, which offers 'Rummy,' qualifies as a skill-based gaming platform and is not prohibited under the IT Act or IT Rules. The Court also noted that the app was blocked nationwide without prior notice or an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard, raising concerns over procedural fairness. Additionally, the ruling highlighted that while betting and gambling fall under List-2 (State List), skill-based gaming is governed by the IT Act, which falls under List-1 (Union List). This distinction suggests that state authorities may not have jurisdiction to impose restrictions on such platforms. The Court acknowledged that the app's gameplay involves elements of strategy, mutation, and combination, reinforcing its classification as a 'Game of Skill' rather than a 'Game of Chance.' The company's petition contests a directive dated May 5, 2025, issued by the Inspector General of Police (Technical Service), Chhattisgarh. This directive had instructed telecom and internet providers to restrict access to specific platforms, including SportsBaazi, citing provisions under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and regional gambling laws. Represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, the petitioner argued that SportsBaazi operates a legally compliant, skill-based fantasy gaming platform, and that the action taken 'was arbitrary, lacked due process', and extended beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the state. (ANI)
