The question (13 marks)
Discuss the decision in Shreya Singhal v Union of India. Explain the framework of article 19(1)(a) and article 19(2), the grounds on which the punishment of offensive online messages was held unconstitutional, and why the blocking provision and the safe harbour for intermediaries were treated differently. (13 marks)
MU Module IV, head 4.1(iii); pack ch. 04, Shreya Singhal.
Plan your answer on paper before you look at the authorities — issue first, then the rule, then apply it to these facts.
It tests Unit 4 · Technology, Social Media and the Law of Legal Writing and Legal Language.
Authorities you will need
- Shreya Singhal v Union of India
- Information Technology Act 2000, ss. 66A, 69A, 79(2) and 79(3)(b)
- Constitution of India, articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(2), 32 and 226
- Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar
How an answer is marked
A full-marks answer names the issue in one line, states the rule with its section, cites the authority, applies it to these facts and concludes — in that order. The app's model answer for this question is written in exactly that shape, with a checklist to mark your own attempt against.