The Bombay High Court has refused to grant a restraining order against the Centre, allowing it to proceed with notifying Fact Check Units (FCUs) under the Information Technology (IT) Rules. The court's decision came during the hearing of a plea seeking to restrain the Centre from implementing the rules until the resolution of the ongoing legal proceedings.
The petitioners in this case, including comedian Kunal Kumra, the Editors Guild of India, and the Association of Indian Magazines, challenged Rule 3(1)(b)(v), which mandates social media companies to take down content flagged as misleading by government-backed FCUs and asked the court to restrain the government from notifying the FCUs under the IT Rules. However, the court ruled that no compelling case had been presented to restrain MeitY from proceeding with the notification.
The petitioners contended that the rules would result in disproportionate and unjustified censorship of online content concerning the Central Government. Additionally, they argued that the FCU Rules are excessively broad, lacking clarity, inherently discriminatory, and characterised by arbitrary elements.
While the court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the Fact Check Units under the IT Rules, it is expected to decide on the matter in due course.
It is noteworthy that the Centre had previously given an undertaking to the court, assuring that it would not proceed with the notification of FCUs until the resolution of the plea before the Bombay High Court. However, with the recent decision, the Centre is now at liberty to proceed with the notification of Fact Check Units under the IT Rules.
