Wednesday, April 24, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

SC Directs To Implead BJP Leader As Party In PIL Seeking Aadhaar Linking To Social Media Accounts

The Supreme Court on Tuesday has dismissed a special leave petition filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay seeking linkage of social media accounts to Adhaar & PAN cards. The Court however directed the petitioner to be impleaded as a party in a similar case.

Brief facts are that the Special Leave Petition was filed in the Supreme court by BJP Leader, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay challenging the order of Delhi High Court, whereby it denied to issue any directions on a PIL, filed by him for Linking of Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and Voter ID Number with Social Media Accounts so that Fake, Ghost and Duplicate Accounts can be weed out.

Before the Delhi High Court, BJP leader Mr. Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay had filed Public Interest Litigation seeking directions to the Central Government to take appropriate steps to link social media accounts with AADHAAR or PAN or Voter ID or any other identification proof to weed out fake, duplicate and ghost accounts in order to control fake news & paid news.

The Delhi High Court had held that: –

“To do a small good, by weeding out fake/ ghost/ duplicate accounts, majority of genuine account holder’s data will be at stake. These aspects of the matter will be appreciated by the respondent-Union of India while enacting a policy for the aforesaid purpose or while amending the existing law after appreciating the report given by the Law Commission after due discussion/ deliberations etc. Thus, no writ and much less a writ of mandamus can be issued by this court”.

Mr. Upadhyay contended before the Supreme Court that Facebook and Twitter were launched in India 2006. Presently, India has 35 million Twitter accounts and 350 million Facebook accounts and around 10% accounts are fake/duplicate/ghost. Cheating (S.415), Cheating by Personation (S.416) Forgery (S.463) and Falsification of accounts (S.477A) is an offence under IPC but creating fake duplicate and ghost accounts is not an offence.

He further added that TheDelhi High Court has failed to appreciate very important facts that fake, duplicate and ghost social media accounts are used to:

1- Tarnish the image of eminent citizens, thus infringing upon their right to reputation, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

2- Attack the dignity of citizens, thus offending their right to dignity, guaranteed under Article 21.

3-Disrupt privacy of individuals, thus invading their right to privacy, guaranteed under Article 21.

4- Spread fake news, thus trespassing right to know of citizens, guaranteed under Article 21.

5-Spread hatred among citizens on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex and place of birth, thus weakening secularism, fraternity, unity and national integration.

6- Promote black magic and superstition, which is against the spirit of Article 51-A.

7-Commit online crimes such as cheating, blackmailing, extortion, fraud, forgery, falsification etc.,

Fake news, created and propagated by fake, duplicate and ghost social media accounts, play a vitiating role in the context of free and fair elections. Fake news, created and promoted by fake, duplicate and ghost social media accounts, has a deep impact on the mind of the common man. It is very difficult for common man to distinguish fake and real accounts. Hence, it is duty of the State to take appropriate steps to weed-out fake, duplicate and ghost social media accounts.

It is necessary to state that Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitutionenables the State to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of national and international security, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency and morality, and also in relation to contempt of Court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

Acting Upon the plea, the bench comprising of Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Justice Krishna Murari & Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, observed that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. The Special Leave Petition was dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file impleadment application in a similar case titled “Sagar Rajabhau Suryavanshi vs. Union of India.”

Read the order here;

8852-2020-35-20-22187-Order-26-May-2020

-India Legal Bureau

spot_img

News Update