Karnataka High Court has adjourned the hearing of writ petition filed (WP No. 13710/2022) by twitter to 09/01/2023.Twitter has filed writ petition through its advocate Manu Prabhakar Kulkarni, challenging 39 blocking orders issued under S.69-A of IT Act, 2000 by MeITY. The writ also challenges letter issued by MeITY to twitter warning for strict criminal actions against Chief Compliance officer upon failure to comply with the orders. Twitter has challenged blocking orders on the ground that such blocking orders are manifestly arbitrary,do not pass test of proportionality and procedurally and substantially not in consonance with section 69-A(1) of IT Act.
Section 69-A (1) of IT Act provides that
“Where the Central Government or any of its officers specially authorized by it in this behalf is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do, in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, defense of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above, it may subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct any agency of the Government or intermediary to block for access by the public or cause to be blocked for access by the public any information generated, transmitted, received, stored or hosted in any computer resource.”
Section 69- A(2) prescribes that blocking for access by public shall be subject to the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public), Rules, 2009 (“Blocking Rules”). Failure to comply with directions issued under Section 69-A(1) of IT Act is punishable with imprisonment which may extend upto 7 years and fine.
Twitter has argued that MeITY has not even disclosed the reasons for passing such orders and lacks transparency in its functioning.