Delhi High Court Faces Challenge Over Mobile Internet Shutdown Amid Protests

Legal Action Against Internet Suspension

New Delhi: The Software Freedom Law Center, India has approached the Delhi High Court to contest the suspension of mobile internet services in parts of Central Delhi. This action comes in the wake of ongoing protests led by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) at Jantar Mantar, which began on June 20, demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan due to allegations of NEET paper leaks and examination irregularities.

The petitioner's counsel requested an urgent hearing before Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, who agreed to consider the matter on Friday. However, the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) could not be addressed during court hours due to certain procedural issues.

The petition seeks to annul the orders issued by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs on July 17, 20, 22, and 23, which mandated the shutdown of mobile internet services in the vicinity of Jantar Mantar. It argues that such a suspension is an extreme measure that infringes on fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including free speech and the right to peaceful assembly.

The petition describes the suspension orders as 'illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional,' asserting that they do not demonstrate any public emergency or provide justification for the sweeping internet shutdown.

It highlights that the authorities invoked Section 20(2)(b) of the Telecom Act, claiming the suspension was necessary for public safety, yet failed to explore less restrictive alternatives before implementing a blanket ban on mobile internet services.

The plea emphasizes that the repeated issuance of six suspension orders within a week raises questions about whether each decision was made independently and in compliance with legal standards.

Additionally, the PIL calls for greater transparency regarding future suspension orders, requesting that they be published on an official website along with the date and time of publication. It also demands the production of all original records related to the suspension, including intelligence reports and statutory approvals.